Raphael Tuju has suffered a blow after the High Court declined to immediately halt the execution of its earlier ruling that struck out his amended suit over prime Karen properties.

In a ruling delivered at the Milimani Law Courts, Justice Josephine Mongare declined to grant interim orders staying the implementation of the court’s decision issued on March 9, 2026.

The earlier ruling had struck out an amended plaint filed by Tuju and his company, Dari Limited, and vacated interim orders that had barred the defendants from dealing with the contested properties.

The case pits Tuju and Dari Limited against Garam Investment Auctioneers, Knight Frank Valuers Limited and other respondents over properties located in Karen.

The disputed properties include L.R. No. 1055/165, Tamarind at Dari Business Park along Ngong Road, and L.R. No. 11320/3, Entim Sidai Wellness Sanctuary, both in Nairobi.

Following the March 9 ruling, Tuju moved back to court seeking urgent orders to stop the implementation of the decision and to obtain leave to appeal.

In the application dated March 11, Tuju argued that without interim protection, the respondents would be free to proceed with the auction, transfer or alienation of the properties.

“The defendants/respondents are now at liberty to proceed with auctioning, transfer and alienation of the properties in a manner which the plaintiffs contend is irregular and illegal,” the application stated.

Tuju also told the court that unless the application was heard urgently, the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if the properties were sold before the appeal is determined.

However, in directions issued on March 12, Justice Mongare only certified the application as urgent but declined to grant interim stay orders stopping the execution of the earlier ruling.

Instead, the court directed that the application be served on the respondents and be mentioned before the presiding judge of the division on March 17 for further directions.

“Since this court is on transfer, let the application be served and be mentioned before the presiding judge of the division on 17/3/2026 for directions,” the judge ordered.

The court nevertheless granted Tuju leave to appeal the March 9 ruling that struck out the amended plaint.

The disputed ruling had also lifted interim orders issued on October 28, 2024, which had restrained the respondents, their agents or employees from advertising, attaching, selling or otherwise interfering with the ownership of the Karen properties.

Tuju had argued that the intended appeal raises substantial legal issues, including claims that the court failed to determine a pending contempt application accusing the respondents of violating earlier court orders.

The matter will now be mentioned before the presiding judge on March 17 to determine the next steps regarding the application and the intended appeal.