Please Wait. The applicant has also sought an order for stay of execution of the decree, pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal. The application is made on the grounds that the intended appellant has a good and sufficient cause for not filing the Appeal on time that the Respondent may execute the decree if a stay is not granted, the intended Appeal will be rendered nugatory and that the applicant will suffer substantial loss and injustice, if the orders sought are not granted.
That it took long for the Insurance Company to trace their office file and after the file was traced, the company felt they needed to appeal against the judgment and by the time they instructed their Advocate to appeal, time within which to do so had lapsed. That the applicant is apprehensive that the Respondent may execute the decree against their insured before the appeal is heard and determined in which case, the intended Appeal shall be rendered nugatory.
The applicant contends that upon execution and payment of the decretal sum, the Respondent is not likely to refund the same should the appeal succeed as he is not financially stable. The applicant further depones that the insurance company is ready and willing to offer security for the decretal sum by issuing a reputable bank guarantee or performance bond from a reputable insurance company and its ready to abide by any condition set by the court.
The application was canvassed by way of oral submissions. Counsel for the applicant relied on the supporting affidavit and urged the court to grant the orders as prayed.
In a replying affidavit sworn by the Respondent on 24 th May , she depones that judgment in the Lower court was delivered in the presence of both parties and the applicant sought and was granted a stay of execution for 30 days within which time he failed to prefer an Appeal against the judgment and the decree.
