MUMIAS SUGAR CO. LTD & another v ALOISE MUTSAYI WALUNYA t/a ISONGOJAGGERY FACTORY & 7 others [2012] KEHC 3701 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA

AT KAKAMEGA

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION 65 OF 2011

MUMIAS SUGAR CO. LTD. ............................................................. 1ST APPLICANT

ISAAC SHEUNDA ........................................................................... 2ND APPLICANT

V E R S U S

ALOISE MUTSAYI WALUNYA t/a ISONGO

JAGGERY FACTORY ...................................................................1ST RESPONDENT

THE HONOURABLE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ................... 2ND RESPONDENT

AIP CHARLES OUMA ................................................................ 3RD RESPONDENT

AIP JAMES WEKESA .................................................................4TH RESPONDENT

CPL. SABASTIAN MANYONYI .................................................. 5TH RESPONDENT

PC THOMAS LIMO ..................................................................... 6TH RESPONDENT

JACKSON WANYAMA ............................................................... 7TH RESPONDENT

DANIEL MARTIN ......................................................................... 8TH RESPONDENT

RULING

The application dated 26. 10. 11 seeks the following orders:-

“a) That this Honourable court be pleased to grant temporary stay of execution of the court decree and judgment in Kakamega CMCC No. 422 of 2006 pending the hearing and determination of this application inter-partes.

b) That the Honourable court be pleased to grant stay of execution of the court’s decree and Judgment in Kakamega CMCC 422 of 2006 pending the hearing and final determination of he intended Appeal.

c) That Applicant be granted leave to file this appeal out oftime.

d) That costs and incidentals to this application to abide by the result of the intended appeal.”

The application is supported by the annexed affidavit of EMILY K. OTIENO sworn on 26. 10. 11.

The application is opposed to as per the grounds of opposition dated 2. 11. 11.

The memorandum of appeal filed herein refers to Kakamega CMCC 422 of 2006. The proceedings of the lower court have not been annexed. It is therefore not clear whether the difference in the case numbers cited is a typographical error or whether the same parties have two suits.

Order 22 rule 25 of the Civil Procedure rules provides for stay of execution pending suit between the Decree Holder and the Judgment Debtor.   With the application herein referring to a different case number from the one appealed from, I hold that the application is incompetent.

Consequently, the application is struck out with costs to the Respondent.

Delivered, dated and signed at Kakamega this 15th day of March, 2012

B. THURANIRA JADEN

J U D G E