Khaemba v Ingosi & 4 others (Miscellaneous Civil Application E036 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 11688 (KLR) (29 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 11688 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KITALE MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION E036 OF 2026 RK LIMO, J JULY 29, 2026 BETWEEN ZADDOCK MAKHANU KHAEMBA ..................................................... PLAINTIFF AND DAVID INGOSI ................................................................................. 1ST DEFENDANT JOHN BORORIO ............................................................................. 2ND DEFENDANT DENNIS SIMIYU WANYONYI ...................................................... 3RD DEFENDANT CAROLYNE NAFUNA OMONDI ................................................. 4TH DEFENDANT FELIZ SHIKOLI AGUTU ................................................................ 5TH DEFENDANT RULING 1. Zaddock Makhanu Khaemba, the applicant herein has brought an application by way of Notice of Motion dated 2-3-2026 seeking declaratory orders with respect to the execution of a decree for payment of taxed costs. 2. The applicant had filed a suit against the respondents vide Kitale HCC No.2 of 2020 and Kitale Constitutional Petition No.2 of 2021 and lost both suits. He was then condemned to pay costs in both cases which incidentally involved advocates. The advocates namely John Bororio and David Ingosi separately executed for their taxed costs. The applicant is now serving civil jail lawfully because he did not pay the taxed costs to the decree holders. 3. The claims by the applicant that the two decree holders colluded to harm him is untrue because as observed above the 2 advocates were sued separately and the applicant lost the battle in the two suits separately. He was also condemned to pay costs in the two separate suits. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11688/eng@2026-07-29 1
page 1 of 2
4. This court finds that there is nothing fraudulent in a litigant executing for his taxed costs which taxed costs were properly assessed or taxed and the same were not challenged. 5. The applicant has told this court that he has challenged the determination of the two suits which is within his rights but there is no stay of execution either in the cited suits or from the Court of Appeal. His claim that the respondents are taking advantage of him because he is a layman is without any basis whatsoever. In the premises this court finds that the application dated 2-3-2026 is not only incompetent and bad in law but it is also without merit. The same is dismissed with costs to the respondents. DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KITALE THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY , 2026. HON JUSTICE R.K. LIMO KITALE HIGH COURT Ruling delivered in open court In the presence of Zaddock Makhanu Khaemba the applicant in person David Ingosi the 1st defendant in person Duke/Chemosop- court assistants https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11688/eng@2026-07-29 2
page 2 of 2