REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CIVIL APPEAL NO. 111 OF 1995 ISAAC NDUNGU MUCHEMI..............................................PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT VERSUS MARULA ESTATE LIMITED.........................................DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT RULING I have reviewed and considered the Applicant's application dated 3rd May 2013.I have also considered the Respondent's Grounds of Opposition dated 20th May 2013 and filed on 21st May, 2013. I am satisfied that the Applicant's application is both res judicata, and indeed this court is not seized of jurisdiction under Order 22, rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 to adjudicate of the Appellant's purported grievances. I am satisfied that the orders sought in the Application were adjudicated and conclusively determined on five previous occasions and that this court is now functus officio. There has to be a stop to litigation. The Applicant cannot be allowed to abuse the court process by reopening litigation which commenced in the subordinate court almost nineteen (19) years ago. I find and hold that the application herein has no merit at all. There is no threat of execution. This is merely a taxation of costs. For those reasons the Applicant's Notice of Motion dated and filed on 3rd May 2013 is dismissed with costs. Dated, signed and delivered at Nakuru this 24th day of May, 2013 M. J. ANYARA EMUKULE JUDGE
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.