Mogeni t/a Elimonyaco Auctioneers v Amolo (Suing as legal representative of the Estate of Jacktone Amolo Oyare); Okongo & 2 others (Defendant) (Environment & Land Case 744 of 2017) [2024] KEELC 5421 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court in Migori ordered police to provide security so an auctioneer could execute an eviction decree upheld on appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicant auctioneer should be provided with reasonable security by the OCS Uriri Station during execution of the decree and eviction from parcel No. Kanyamkago/Kajuju/488
- 2.Whether the decree arising from the judgment of 20th March 2019 (upheld on appeal) should be executed
Key legal issues
#Whether police assistance/security should be extended to a decree-holder's auctioneer for execution of an upheld decree
Yes; the OCS Uriri Station is ordered to provide reasonable security and to evict the respondent from the suit parcel in execution of the decree
The decree-holder's judgment of 20th March 2019 was upheld on appeal by the Court of Appeal in Kisumu Civil Appeal No. 73 of 2019 on 23rd June 2023. Counsel for the 1st defendant/decree holder urged prayer No. 2, and the court found the application merited, anchored on sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, sections 3 and 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act, and Article 159(2)(b) of the Constitution (justice shall not be delayed).
Legal principles established
#- An auctioneer executing a decree upheld on appeal is entitled to police security during execution and eviction
Court orders
#- 1.The ex-parte notice of motion dated 30th April 2024 is allowed in terms of prayer No. 2, namely that the OCS Uriri Station provides the applicant with reasonable security during execution and evicts the Plaintiff/Respondent from suit parcel No. Kanyamkago/Kajuju/488 and effects the court order issued on 11th May 2019
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 3, 3A and 78 of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap. 21); sections 3 and 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015; Article 159(2)(b) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Relief refused
#Prayer No. 1 (marked 'Moot' in the judgment)
The court did not grant this prayer, describing it as moot
Costs
No costs order made in the judgment.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Accordingly, the application is allowed in terms of prayer No. 2 therein for the execution of the decree, in line with the judgment of this court herein.
Justice shall not be delayed.
In the premises, the application is merited being guided by sections 3, and 3A (supra) and sections 3 and 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act, 2015 (2011).
It is so ordered.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency in dates: the grounds state an eviction order dated 11th May 2013 arising from Case No. 744 of 2017, and elsewhere an order dated 11th May 2019 and a judgment of 20th March 2019
Date inconsistency in receipt of the eviction order ('4th May 2020') relative to the eviction order dated 11th May 2019
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mogeni t/a Elimonyaco Auctioneers v Amolo (Suing as legal representative of the Estate of Jacktone Amolo Oyare); Okongo & 2 others (Defendant) (Environment & Land Case 744 of 2017) [2024] KEELC 5421 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment (arises from Case No. 744 of 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/5421/eng@2024-07-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.