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

Maina v Njeru

Maina v Njeru (Civil Appeal E125 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 12839 (KLR) (30 July 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 12839 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAKURU CIVIL APPEAL E125 OF 2024 JM NANG'EA, J JULY 30, 2025 BETWEEN MARTIN MUKUA MAINA .................................................................... APPELLANT AND JOHN KARIUKI NJERU .................................................................... RESPONDENT RULING 1. This Ruling follows the Appellant’s Notice of Motion dated 25th April 2025 for the following orders; 1. Spent 2. Spent 3. Spent 4. That pending hearing and determination of the instant appeal, the Honourable Court be pleased to stay execution of the judgement delivered on 5th October 2021 and all consequential orders. 5. That the costs and incidental to the application abide by the ourcome of the appeal (sic). 2. No reply has been filed despite evidence of service of the Application upon the Respondent. 3. Having perused the Applicant’s Supporting Affidavit, the Application is allowed as hereunder it being unopposed; a. Stay of execution of the impugned judgement and/or decree is ordered pending hearing and determination of appeal. b. The costs of the Application shall abide the appeal. RULING DATED, DELIVERED AND SIGNED AT NAKURU THIS 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2025. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/12839/eng@2025-07-30 1

page 1 of 2

J. M. NANG’EA, JUDGE. In the presence of;Ms Kimotho advocate for the Appellant/Applicant Respondent, Absent C/A (Jenifier) J. M. NANG’EA, JUDGE. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/12839/eng@2025-07-30 2

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.