REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MARSABIT
CONSTITUTIONAL & HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION
PETITION NO. E006 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF; ARTICLES 1,2,3,6,10,19,20,21,22,23,27,28,40,47,48,60,162(1),165,232,258(1) AND 259(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA,2010
AND
IN THE MATTER OF SUCCESSION OF THE ESTATE OF ISYA GABABA CHEGE
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ELIZABETH ISAYA & SUSAN DIRAM GABABA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF UNCONSITUTIONAL, UNFAIR SUCCESSION, SUBDIVISION, REGISTRATION AND/OR DISPOSITION OF ANCESTRAL LAND IN THE ESTATE OF ISAYA GABABA CHEGE
BETWEEN
ELIZABETH ISAYA…………………………..…..1 ST PEITIONER/APPLICANT
SUSAN DIRAM GABABA………………………2 nd PEITIONER/APPLICANT
VERSUS
GURACHA GABABA CHEGE………………………....…1 ST RESPONDENT
CHEGE GABABA……………….………………..….…...2 nd RESPONDENT
JOSEPH GABABA………….…………..…….…...….....3 rd RESPONDENT
DAUDI GABABA……………………………..…..……..4 th RESPONDENT
TADIKO MATO CHARI………………………….…….5 th RESPONDENT
MUMINA QARE ABDIKADIR MUSA……….….…….6 th RESPONDENT
LAND REGISTRAR, ISIOLO REGISTRY…………….…7 th RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
A. Introduction
1. The application before this court for determination is the Respondents/Applicants Notice of Motion application dated 23 rd March 2026 brought pursuant to provisions of Section 1A, 1B,3, 3A, and 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, Section 48 of the Advocates Act, Cap 16, Order 21 Rule 9, Order 22 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 and all other enabling provisions of law. The applicant prays for orders that;
a) That the Ruling of this Honourable court delivered on 16 th February 2026 by Hon Justice Francis Rayola Olel and the consequent order issued on 18 th February 2026, awarding costs of the suit to the Applicant in the sum of Kenya shillings One hundred and fifty thousand (Kshs.150,000/=), be and is hereby adopted as the judgment and decree of this Honorable court.
b) That judgment be entered in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Kenya shillings One hundred and fifty thousand (Kshs.150,000/=) together with the value added tax (VAT) at 16% plus interest at court rates from the date of the ruling until payment in full.
c) That a decree be issued to the Applicant to enable execution for the recovery of the said sum.
d) That the costs of this Application be provided for.
2. This application is supported by the grounds on the face of the said application and the Supporting affidavit of the 2 nd /Respondent/Applicant, one Mr Samuel Isaya dated 23 rd March 2026, where he avers that vide the ruling dated 16 th February 2026, they were awarded costs of Kshs.150,000/= plus VAT thereon and that the same had become due and payable, but the respondents had refused to settle the same despite formal demand.
3. That they had been advised by their advocate that the ruling and order awarding costs needed to be adopted as a judgment of this court to facilitate the extraction of an executable decree and thus prayed that the orders sought be allowed in the interest of justice.
4. The Respondents/Petitioners did not file any response to this Application, and even when the court cross checked on the CTS portal, the same position obtained,
(B). Analysis & Determination
5. I have carefully considered the Application, and the affidavit filed in support and find that this application is misconceived in law, as it is not necessary to convert the order herein into a decree before warrants of execution can issue. That procedure is specifically provided for under the Advocates Act, where the advocate files a Miscellaneous Application to tax his Advocate/Client bill of costs and then seeks to convert the same into judgment.
6. The order herein is directly executable under the relevant provisions of Order 22 of the Civil procedure Rules and to that extent I do find that this Application is misconceived and the same is dismissed with costs to the Petitioners/Respondents.
7. It is so ordered .
READ, SIGNED and DELIVERED virtually at MARSABIT on this ……17th ……… day of SEPTEMBER 2026.
FRANCIS RAYOLA OLEL
JUDGE
Delivered on the virtual platform, Teams this …17th …… day of SEPTEMBER, 2026.
In the presence of;
………………………………….for Appellant
………………………………….for Respondent
……………JARSO…………………….Court Assistant
Francis Olel2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MARSABIT
CONSTITUTIONAL & HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION
PETITION NO. E006 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF; ARTICLES 1,2,3,6,10,19,20,21,22,23,27,28,40,47,48,60,162(1),165,232,258(1) AND 259(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA,2010
AND
IN THE MATTER OF SUCCESSION OF THE ESTATE OF ISYA GABABA CHEGE
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ELIZABETH ISAYA & SUSAN DIRAM GABABA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF UNCONSITUTIONAL, UNFAIR SUCCESSION, SUBDIVISION, REGISTRATION AND/OR DISPOSITION OF ANCESTRAL LAND IN THE ESTATE OF ISAYA GABABA CHEGE
BETWEEN
ELIZABETH ISAYA…………………………..…..1 ST PEITIONER/APPLICANT
SUSAN DIRAM GABABA………………………2 nd PEITIONER/APPLICANT
VERSUS
GURACHA GABABA CHEGE………………………....…1 ST RESPONDENT
CHEGE GABABA……………….………………..….…...2 nd RESPONDENT
JOSEPH GABABA………….…………..…….…...….....3 rd RESPONDENT
DAUDI GABABA……………………………..…..……..4 th RESPONDENT
TADIKO MATO CHARI………………………….…….5 th RESPONDENT
MUMINA QARE ABDIKADIR MUSA……….….…….6 th RESPONDENT
LAND REGISTRAR, ISIOLO REGISTRY…………….…7 th RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
A. Introduction
1. The application before this court for determination is the Respondents/Applicants Notice of Motion application dated 23 rd March 2026 brought pursuant to provisions of Section 1A, 1B,3, 3A, and 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, Section 48 of the Advocates Act, Cap 16, Order 21 Rule 9, Order 22 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 and all other enabling provisions of law. The applicant prays for orders that;
a) That the Ruling of this Honourable court delivered on 16 th February 2026 by Hon Justice Francis Rayola Olel and the consequent order issued on 18 th February 2026, awarding costs of the suit to the Applicant in the sum of Kenya shillings One hundred and fifty thousand (Kshs.150,000/=), be and is hereby adopted as the judgment and decree of this Honorable court.
b) That judgment be entered in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Kenya shillings One hundred and fifty thousand (Kshs.150,000/=) together with the value added tax (VAT) at 16% plus interest at court rates from the date of the ruling until payment in full.
c) That a decree be issued to the Applicant to enable execution for the recovery of the said sum.
d) That the costs of this Application be provided for.
2. This application is supported by the grounds on the face of the said application and the Supporting affidavit of the 2 nd /Respondent/Applicant, one Mr Samuel Isaya dated 23 rd March 2026, where he avers that vide the ruling dated 16 th February 2026, they were awarded costs of Kshs.150,000/= plus VAT thereon and that the same had become due and payable, but the respondents had refused to settle the same despite formal demand.
3. That they had been advised by their advocate that the ruling and order awarding costs needed to be adopted as a judgment of this court to facilitate the extraction of an executable decree and thus prayed that the orders sought be allowed in the interest of justice.
4. The Respondents/Petitioners did not file any response to this Application, and even when the court cross checked on the CTS portal, the same position obtained,
(B). Analysis & Determination
5. I have carefully considered the Application, and the affidavit filed in support and find that this application is misconceived in law, as it is not necessary to convert the order herein into a decree before warrants of execution can issue. That procedure is specifically provided for under the Advocates Act, where the advocate files a Miscellaneous Application to tax his Advocate/Client bill of costs and then seeks to convert the same into judgment.
6. The order herein is directly executable under the relevant provisions of Order 22 of the Civil procedure Rules and to that extent I do find that this Application is misconceived and the same is dismissed with costs to the Petitioners/Respondents.
7. It is so ordered .
READ, SIGNED and DELIVERED virtually at MARSABIT on this ……17th ……… day of SEPTEMBER 2026.
FRANCIS RAYOLA OLEL
JUDGE
Delivered on the virtual platform, Teams this …17th …… day of SEPTEMBER, 2026.
In the presence of;
………………………………….for Appellant
………………………………….for Respondent
……………JARSO…………………….Court Assistant
Francis Olel2