1.It is settled law that the residual jurisdiction of this Court to review its own decision should be invoked with circumspection. In Benjoh Amalgamated Limited v. Kenya Commercial Bank Limited  eKLR this Court explains this jurisdiction;
2.Through an undated application but filed on 5th December, 2022 Sylanus M. Walutsachi (the applicant) asks us to review the decision of this Court (Kiage, Mumbi Ngugi and Tuiyott, JJA) made on 23rd September, 2022, dismissing his appeal. The grounds on the face of the application and the affidavit in support reveal why the applicant beseeches us to review our Judgment. He states that this Court overstepped its mandate in upholding the judgment of the High Court without keenly evaluating the real grounds in the memorandum of appeal; by considering the submissions dated 15th January, 2019 by learned counsel Joseph Makhokha when counsel was not on record; and by overlooking the applicant’s evaluation of the evidence.
3.Two of the grounds are asking this Court to sit on appeal over its decision, an invitation that this Court respectfully, but firmly, declines. The jurisdiction to review is not a jurisdiction for this Court to sit on appeal over its own decision and is clearly not one of the exceptional occasions when the residual jurisdiction will be activated (Benjoh Amalgamated).
4.On the charge that this Court considered and determined the matter on submissions of counsel who was not properly on record, no reasons have been put forth as to why Mr. Wanyonyi, learned counsel for the respondent, was not properly on record and the assertion suffers an insurmountable difficulty. At any rate, it is clear, on rereading our impugned decision, that the outcome would have remained unchanged even without the benefit of considering those submissions.
5.The motion of 15th November, 2022 is without merit and is hereby dismissed. But as the respondents did not attend Court, there shall be no order on costs.