The court thus held that the affidavit was incurably defective and a nullity.
The appellant further argued that there was fraud on part of the respondent in trying to obtain the suit land. The court however found that the appellant had failed to specifically plead the alleged particulars of fraud which the stay was intended for. This ground too failed for that reason.
The court further still found that there was a pending suit involving the appellant, and thus it could not allow the application to go on. The appellant court thus found no fault on the trail magistrate in its decision for the above reasons.
Therefore, the court upheld the decision and dismissed the appeal with costs to the respondent.