Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Jared Iqbal Abdul Bahman & another v Bernard Alfred Wekesa Sambu & another [2001] KECA 329 (KLR)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: OMOLO, SHAH & O'KUBASU JJ.A CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 120 OF 2001 (UR.68/2001) BETWEEN JARED IQBAL ABDUL BAHMAN….............................1ST APPLICANT ADILA ALIBASHIR .......................................................2ND APPLICANT AND BERNARD ALFRED WEKESA SAMBU ................1ST RESPONDENT JOHN MUREITHI KARIUKI ....................................2ND RESPONDENT (An application for stay of execution pending an appeal from the Judgment and decree of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Kasanga-Mulwa, J) dated 6th October, 2000 in H.C.C.C. NO. 1059 OF 1995) ***************** RULING OF THE COURT Mr. Iseme for the first respondent has conceded that the appeal already lodged by the applicants, that is, Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2001 is an arguable one. We think Mr. Iseme is quite right in so conceding. The dispute is as regards land being L.R. NO. 209/9684 situate in Nairobi. The said Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2001 is already fixed for hearing before this Court on 21st November, 2001. In these circumstances we see no point in the execution of the decree in H.C.C.C. No. 1059 of 1995. We order that the execution of that decree be stayed pending the hearing and determination of Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2001. The costs of this application will be costs in the appeal. Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 20th day of September, 2001. R.S.C. OMOLO ............................ JUDGE OF APPEAL A.B. SHAH ............................. JUDGE OF APPEAL

page 1 of 2

E. O. O'KUBASU ............................... JUDGE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original. DEPUTY REGISTRAR.

page 2 of 2

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.