VERSUS
This matter came up before this court on 8 th June 2026 for purposes of taking further directions in respect of the application dated 13 th April, 2026 which seeks for review of the Judgment which was delivered on 5 th November, 2025.
I have gone through the said application and particularly seeks;
1. Stay of execution of the Judgment.
2. An order preserving the Status Quo.
3. The court be pleased to review, vary and or set aside the Judgment delivered on 5 th November 2025.
4. The Honorable Court do re-open the matter for rehearing on the limited and fundamental issue of the existence and status of Plot Number 38, Oyugis Town w ith due consideration of all material evidence already on court record.
5. I have also looked at the Supporting affidavit and what the Applicant states is that the Court found that plot number 38 Oyugis town does not exist and proceeded to grant orders of eviction and injunction against the defendant/applicant, that the finding was made without consideration of material documentary evidence and the said documents are referred to at Paragraph 8 of the Supporting affidavit.
6. The said documents are marked as a bundle TOI. The applicant also refers to a report by the land Registrar.
7. While Counsel for the applicant appeared in Court in the absence of Counsel for the Plaintiff he requested for an adjournment to file a map.
8. However, he indicated that he had already filed submissions in compliance with Court directions.
9. Since Counsel for the Plaintiff/Respondent was absent, the Court adjourned the matter to allow Counsel effect Service.
10. On 10th July 2026, Counsel made the same application which has been opposed.
11. Having perused the file, I note that judgment was delivered by the Court and the Defendant, having been dissatisfied opted to file an application for review.
12. The Court made directions and when Counsel appeared, he confirmed having filed Submissions. The applicant as at the time of filing the application ob viously knew what he wanted by filing the application now before Court and incorporated everything in the affidavit. I find that there is no mention of the Map, which to me, I deem to be an afterthought.
13. I find and hold that the application to produce the map is an afterthought and meant to delay this matter further.
14. The application is therefore refus ed .
15. I direct that a date for Ruling be taken so as to have this matter concluded.
JUSTICE J.W WANYONYI – JUDGE
RULING, DATED AND DELIVERED VIA TEAMS PLATFORM THIS 10 TH DAY OF JULY 2026.
In the Presence of;
1. Ochwangi for the plaintiff-Present
2. Ogweno for the Defendant /Applicant-Absent
3. Court Assistant, Ms. Dalphine.
Court: Ruling in respect of the application dated 13 th April 2026 shall be on 14 th September 2026 at 10:30 a.m, Ruling Notice to Issue.
JUSTICE J.W WANYONYI -JUDGE
| Page HOMA BAY ELCC NO 28 OF 2021, RULING ON PRODUCTON OF A MAP. D.O.D 10.7.2026.
This matter came up before this court on 8 th June 2026 for purposes of taking further directions in respect of the application dated 13 th April, 2026 which seeks for review of the Judgment which was delivered on 5 th November, 2025.
I have gone through the said application and particularly seeks;
1. Stay of execution of the Judgment.
2. An order preserving the Status Quo.
3. The court be pleased to review, vary and or set aside the Judgment delivered on 5 th November 2025.
4. The Honorable Court do re-open the matter for rehearing on the limited and fundamental issue of the existence and status of Plot Number 38, Oyugis Town w ith due consideration of all material evidence already on court record.
5. I have also looked at the Supporting affidavit and what the Applicant states is that the Court found that plot number 38 Oyugis town does not exist and proceeded to grant orders of eviction and injunction against the defendant/applicant, that the finding was made without consideration of material documentary evidence and the said documents are referred to at Paragraph 8 of the Supporting affidavit.
6. The said documents are marked as a bundle TOI. The applicant also refers to a report by the land Registrar.
7. While Counsel for the applicant appeared in Court in the absence of Counsel for the Plaintiff he requested for an adjournment to file a map.
8. However, he indicated that he had already filed submissions in compliance with Court directions.
9. Since Counsel for the Plaintiff/Respondent was absent, the Court adjourned the matter to allow Counsel effect Service.
10. On 10th July 2026, Counsel made the same application which has been opposed.
11. Having perused the file, I note that judgment was delivered by the Court and the Defendant, having been dissatisfied opted to file an application for review.
12. The Court made directions and when Counsel appeared, he confirmed having filed Submissions. The applicant as at the time of filing the application ob viously knew what he wanted by filing the application now before Court and incorporated everything in the affidavit. I find that there is no mention of the Map, which to me, I deem to be an afterthought.
13. I find and hold that the application to produce the map is an afterthought and meant to delay this matter further.
14. The application is therefore refus ed .
15. I direct that a date for Ruling be taken so as to have this matter concluded.
JUSTICE J.W WANYONYI – JUDGE
RULING, DATED AND DELIVERED VIA TEAMS PLATFORM THIS 10 TH DAY OF JULY 2026.
In the Presence of;
1. Ochwangi for the plaintiff-Present
2. Ogweno for the Defendant /Applicant-Absent
3. Court Assistant, Ms. Dalphine.
Court: Ruling in respect of the application dated 13 th April 2026 shall be on 14 th September 2026 at 10:30 a.m, Ruling Notice to Issue.
JUSTICE J.W WANYONYI -JUDGE
| Page HOMA BAY ELCC NO 28 OF 2021, RULING ON PRODUCTON OF A MAP. D.O.D 10.7.2026.