REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KERICHO CIVIL APPEAL NO. E052 OF 2025 SAMWEL KIPKIRUI ……………..APPELLANT/APPLICANT MARITIM VERSUS LEL……………………..1ST MESHACK KIPMISOI RESPONDENT ARAP MOSONIK RESPONDENT LEL…………………………………….2ND ARAP (Being an Appeal from the Ruling and Order of the Honourable F. Nekesa, Senior Resident Magistrate, delivered on 10th June, 2025 in Kericho Chief Magistrate’s Court Succession Cause No.E214 of 2024) BETWEEN LEL……………………….1ST MESHACK PETITIONER KIPMISOI ARAP MOSONIK PETITIONER ARAP LEL……………………….................2ND AND SAMWEL MARITIM…………........................PROTESTOR KIPKURUI RULING 1. In the motion dated 6th August, 2025, Samwel Kipkurui Maritim, the appellant/Applicant herein, sought for an order for Stay of Execution of the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant dated 10th November, 2016 pending the hearing and determination of this Appeal. Page 1
page 1 of 5
2. The Applicant filed an Affidavit he swore in Support of the motion. When served with the motion, the Respondents did not deem it fit to file a response to the Application. 3. I have considered the grounds set out on the face of the motion plus the facts deponed in Supporting Affidavit. It is the averment of the Applicant that he filed an Affidavit of Protest against the summons for Confirmation of Grant. It is his further submission that the Trial Magistrate proceeded to dismiss the Protest on 10th June, 2025 and being dissatisfied, he preferred this Appeal to challenge the dismissal order. The Applicant is fearful that the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant made on 10th November, 2016 may be implemented unless an order for Stay of Execution is granted. 4. In the Appeal, the Appellant/Applicant is seeking to have the ruling dismissing the Protest set aside and for the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant revoked. Page 2 It is the Appellant/s
page 2 of 5
submission that he would on Appeal argue inter alia that the Estate be equally distributed amongst the beneficiaries. 5. In the absence of any rebuttal from the Respondents, it would appear that unless the order for Stay of the implementation of the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant issued on 10th November, 2016, execution would take place before the instant Appeal is heard and determined. 6. In the end, I find the motion dated 6 th August, 2025 to be meritorious. It is allowed. 7. Consequently, an order for Stay of Execution and or implementation of the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant dated 10/11/2016 is granted pending Appeal. This being a family dispute, a fair order on costs is that each party should bear its own costs. Delivered, signed and dated at Kericho this 19th day of February, 2026 ……………………………. J.K. SERGON JUDGE In the presence of:C/Assistant - Ruto Page 3
page 3 of 5
Lang’at for the Appellant/Applicant Page 4
page 4 of 5
Page 5
page 5 of 5