[2024] KEELC 7344 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's grievance was essentially a request to amend the originating summons, but the application was brought as one for review. The court held that the principles governing review of a decision are distinct from those governing amendment of pleadings, and the two cannot be applied...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 7344 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Salim Islam Abeid; Respondent: Imranali Chandabhai Abdulhussein
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Malindi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Enviromental and Land Originating Summons 31 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Originating Summons / Ruling on Application for Review
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Review of Judgment, Amendment of Pleadings, Registrar of Titles, Execution of Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Salim Islam Abeid
Applicant
Imranali Chandabhai Abdulhussein
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Ruling on Application for Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should review and/or vary its previous judgment and orders to correct the registrar of titles from Kilifi to Mombasa in relation to the suit property.
- 2 Whether the application for review is the proper procedure to amend the originating summons.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's grievance was essentially a request to amend the originating summons, but the application was brought as one for review. The court held that the principles governing review of a decision are distinct from those governing amendment of pleadings, and the two cannot be applied interchangeably. Since the applicant sought to amend a pleading through a review application, the court found the procedure improper. Additionally, the court declined to revisit the judgment dated 17/10/2023, citing the doctrine of res judicata, as the issue had already been addressed in a previous ruling. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for review.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 24/6/2024 is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Abeid v Abdulhussein (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons 31 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 7344 (KLR) (6 November 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 7344 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Enviromental and Land Originating Summons 31 of 2022
FM Njoroge, J
November 6, 2024
Between
Salim Islam Abeid
Applicant
and
Imranali Chandabhai Abdulhussein
Respondent
Ruling
1. The application for determination is dated 24/6/2024 for orders that: -1. Spent.2. This honourable court be pleased to review and/or vary its judgment that was delivered by Honourable Lady Justice M.A Odeny on 17/10/2023 and further orders of justice Francis Njoroge issued on 12/6/2024 by ordering that the anomaly on the originating summons dated 11/5/2022 be corrected and there be a replacement of the Kilifi Registrar of Titles with that of Mombasa Registrar of Titles and further the order as framed on the Originating Summons dated 11/5/2022, the registrar of titles, Mombasa County to delete entries in favour of the Respondent in respects to L.R No. MN/III/2483 being plot no. MN/III/2483 whose title is registered in Mombasa County as per Order No.5. 3.his honourable court be pleased to make such further orders as are necessary for the ends of justice to be met.4. The costs of the application be provided for.
2. The application which was brought under Article 50 and 159 of the Constitution; Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 80 of the Civil Procedure Act; and Order 45 rules 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6, Order 22 and Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, was supported by the Applicant’s affidavit sworn on 24/6/2024. The grounds in support of the application were that the Applicant has been unable to execute judgment delivered by this court on 17/10/2023 for reasons that the orders sought in the main suit, the originating summons dated 11/5/2022, were directed to the Registrar of Titles, Kilifi as opposed to the Registrar of Titles, Mombasa where the suit property L.R No. MN/III/2483 is registered.
3. The Applicant asserted that his advocate erroneously failed to disclose within the originating summons and previous application for review dated 13/3/2024, that while the suit property is physically located in Kilifi its registration was before the Mombasa Registrar of Titles. The Applicant now wants the alleged discrepancy rectified in the originating summons, to reflect the true position. He asserted that no prejudice will be occasioned should the application be granted.
4. The application is unopposed. However, it must be noted that the Applicant filed a somewhat similar application dated 13/3/2024 wherein the substantive prayer was framed as follows:b."that honourable court be pleased to review and/or vary its ruling (sic) that was delivered by Honourable Lady Justice M.A. Odeny on 17/10/2023 by ordering the registrar of titles Mombasa County to delete entries in favour of the respondent in respects of L.R No. MN/III/2483 being Plot No. MN/III/2483 whose title is registered in Mombasa County.”
5. In the ruling delivered on 12/6/2024, I noted under paragraph 3 and 7, and which my view still remains, the exact grievance of the Applicant is to amend the originating summons.
6. The Applicant wants this court to review the ruling delivered on 12/6/2024 and judgment dated 17/10/2023. Firstly, I will not delve into the latter since doing so will be acting contrary to the principles of res-judicata, having addressed that issue in the said ruling.
7. In relation to review of the ruling dated 12/6/2024, the court is essentially being implored to amend a pleading albeit through an application for review which is not proper. I say so because on the one hand, the principles in deciding whether or not a court will review its decision, and on the other hand whether or not it will allow an application for amendment of a pleading are different, not to be applied interchangeably.
8. In light of the above, I decline to grant the orders sought and I hereby dismiss the motion dated 24/6/2024 with no orders as to costs.
RULING DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MALINDI VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ON THIS 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024. MWANGI NJOROGEJUDGE, ELC, MALINDI