Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedApplication by Motion on Notice dated 11/02/2021 (pending suit on land parcels LR Nos. 1803 and 7393)· [2021] KEELC 3531 (KLR)

Nyakinyua Mugumo Tree Co. Ltd v Joseph Mwangi Gichuhi & 6 others [2021] KEELC 3531 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
3 May 2021
2,719 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Kitale Environment and Land Court refused to stop a completed land auction but ordered the auctioneers to account for the sale proceeds within 30 days.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Kitale (Mwangi Njoroge, J) on a Motion dated 11/02/2021 by the Plaintiff/Judgment-Debtor, a committee whose members occupy land parcels 1803 and 7393 housing over 4,000 people. The Applicant sought stay of the intended sale of parcel 1803, an order for a joint account for members' deposits, and six months to settle the taxed party-and-party costs of Kshs. 18,355,825.00, citing COVID-19 hardship and claims of having raised Kshs. 5,000,000.00. The Decree-Holders opposed, disputing evidence of deposits and offering only a three-month indulgence conditioned on immediate payment. The Court declined stay of execution on two grounds: the identical prayer had been dismissed in a ruling of 15/10/2020, rendering the prayer res judicata under Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the property had in fact been sold by public auction on 05/11/2020 to Njorkakia Investments and Nyakinyua Karara for Kshs. 35,200,000.00, with no objection raised. The joint account prayer was untenable as the sale was fait accompli and the decretal sum appeared realized. No instalment order was granted because no evidence supported the claimed deposits or availability of funds. Noting the discrepancy between the decree and the auction proceeds, the Court ordered Lifewood Traders Auctioneers to file a statement of accounts and account of sale proceeds within 30 days, and directed the parties to fix a mention date thereafter for further directions.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether stay of execution could be granted

Holding

The prayer for stay was refused: it was res judicata, having been determined in a ruling of 15/10/2020, and in any event the suit property had already been sold by public auction on 05/11/2020 and no objection to the sale was raised; the Applicant also failed to demonstrate merits, irreparable harm and balance of convenience, and there was inordinate delay.

Reasoning

The Court found the identical prayer for stay of the intended auction of LR No. 1803 was previously heard and dismissed in a ruling of 15/10/2020, invoking Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and the Uhuru Highway authority on res judicata in applications. Independently, the Court found on the auctioneers' documents that the property was sold on 05/11/2020 to third parties without objection, and that the Applicant failed the merits, substantial loss and balance of convenience tests, with inordinate delay since judgment of 06/09/2016.

p. 2
02

Whether a joint account should be opened for deposits towards the decree

Holding

The prayer was untenable because the decretal sum appeared realized from the auction; the Court instead directed the auctioneers to account for the proceeds.

Reasoning

The Court found the property sold for Kshs. 35,200,000.00 against a decree of Kshs. 18,355,825.00, making the sale fait accompli. It invoked Rule 18(4) of the Auctioneers Rules 1997 imposing a duty on the auctioneer to remit proceeds less charges to the court or instructing party. Since the Respondents were the instructing client, the Court required the Respondents to demonstrate whether the decretal sum was satisfied and account for the balance, rendering the joint account prayer untenable.

p. 3
03

Whether the Applicant should be granted 6 months to settle the decretal sum by instalments

Holding

No instalment or extension order was granted; the Applicant failed to evidence possession of Kshs. 5,000,000.00 or bona fide deposits, though the Court gave the benefit of doubt as to intentions.

Reasoning

Applying Order 21 Rule 12 of the Civil Procedure Rules and the Keshvaji Jethabhai and Hildegard Ndalut principles, the debtor must show bona fides by arranging prompt payment of a fair proportion. The Court noted no evidence of deposits or of the Kshs. 5,000,000.00 being within reach, treating the claims with circumspection. While acknowledging COVID-19 hardship, no express instalment order issued; only consequential directions for accounting and a mention were made.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • The doctrine of res judicata applies to applications; once a prayer has been heard and determined it cannot be re-litigated in a fresh application.
  • Upon entry of judgment the judgment-debtor must settle the decretal sum immediately unless by consent or court order the mode of payment is varied; instalment orders require demonstration of bona fides by prompt payment of a fair proportion.
  • An auctioneer has a statutory duty to remit sale proceeds, less charges, to the court or the instructing party with an itemized account.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Lifewood Traders Auctioneers shall deposit before this Court a statement of accounts together with an account of the proceeds of the sale within 30 days from the date of this order
  2. 2.Parties herein shall fix a mention date after 30 days of this order for further directions

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B, 3, 3A
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 7
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51 Rule 1
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 Rule 12
  • Auctioneers Act Cap 526 Laws of Kenya (Auctioneers Rules 1997)Rule 18(4)

Cases cited (5)

  • Stephen Wanjohi -vs- Central Glass Industries Limited
    Nairobi HCCC No. 6726 of 1991
  • Uhuru Highway Development Limited v Central Bank of Kenya & 2 others
    Civil Appeal No. 36 of 1996 [1996] eKLR
  • Keshvaji Jethabhai & Bros Limited V Saleh Abdulla
    [1959] EA 260
  • Hildegard Ndalut v Lelkina Dairies Ltd & Anor.
    (2005) eKLR
  • Sawatram Ramprasad -vs- Imperial Bank of India
    (1933) AIR Nag. 33
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nyakinyua Mugumo Tree Co. Ltd v Joseph Mwangi Gichuhi & 6 others [2021] KEELC 3531 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Application by Motion on Notice dated 11/02/2021 (pending suit on land parcels LR Nos. 1803 and 7393). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/3531/eng@2021-05-03

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.