Otom (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Thomas Otom Agullo) v Commissioner of Lands & 4 others (Environment and Land Case 747 of 2015) [2025] KEELC 6486 (KLR) (2 July 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 6486 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KISUMU ENVIRONMENT AND LAND CASE 747 OF 2015 E ASATI, J JULY 2, 2025 BETWEEN MICHAEL ODERA OTOM ....................................................................... PLAINTIFF SUING AS THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF THOMAS OTOM AGULLO AND THE COMMISSIONER OF LANDS ............................................... 1ST DEFENDANT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ........................................................ 2ND DEFENDANT KISUMU TEACHERS’ SACCO LIMITED (KITE) ....................... 3RD DEFENDANT KISUMU COUNTY GOVERNMENT ........................................... 4TH DEFENDANT NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION .............................................. 5TH DEFENDANT RULING 1. The Notice of Motion application dated 29th May, 2025 brought by the Plaintifi pursuant to the provisions of Order 21 Rule 8, Order 42 Rule 6(1), (2) and Order 51 Rule1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act seeks for an order of stay of execution and/or enforcement of the judgement of this court delivered on 8th May, 2025 pending hearing and determination of an appeal to the Court of Appeal. 2. The grounds of the appeal are partly that unless the orders sought are granted, the appeal will be rendered nugatory and that the Plaintifi is likely to be evicted from the only place he has known as his home for years thereby rendering immense prejudice to the Applicant. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6486/eng@2025-07-02 1
page 1 of 2
3. The application was supported by the averment in the Supporting Afidavit sworn by the Applicant on 29th May, 2025 and the annextures thereto. 4. The application was opposed by the 3rd Defendant vide Grounds of Opposition dated 11th June 2025. 5. I have considered the application and the grounds of opposition advanced. The judgement whose execute is sought to be stayed only dismissed the suit with costs. No eviction orders were issued in the judgement. 6. The decree emanating from the judgement will therefore not be capable of execution save for recovery of costs. There is no evidence of imminent execution. The grounds for grant of an order of stay of execution of judgement have not been demonstrated. Application is declined. No orders as to costs. Orders accordingly. RULING, DATED AND SIGNED AT KISUMU, READ VIRTUALLY THIS 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS ONLINE APPLICATION. E. ASATI, JUDGE. In the presence of: Maureen: Court Assistant. Omollo Achieng for the Plaintifi/Applicant No appearance for the Defendant/Respondent https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6486/eng@2025-07-02 2
page 2 of 2