[2018] KEELC 4340 (KLR)
The court found that the Defendants, in their Defence, unequivocally admitted the Plaintiff's claim by stating they had voluntarily vacated the suit property and did not require court orders against them. There was no dispute left for trial as the Defendants had acknowledged the Plaintiff's ownership and possession...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 4340 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Alexander Kimuyu Nduva; Defendant: Michael Kavita Ngei; Defendant: Annastacia Kaluki Ngei
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 107 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Admission
- Outcome
- application allowed; judgment entered for plaintiff on admission
- Judges
- OA Angote
- Legal Topics
- Ownership Disputes, Vacant Possession, Permanent Injunction, Admission of Claim, Trespass, Declaratory 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
Alexander Kimuyu Nduva
Plaintiff
Michael Kavita Ngei
Defendant
Annastacia Kaluki Ngei
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Admission
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Defendants have admitted the Plaintiff's claim in their Defence.
- 2 Whether judgment should be entered on admission as prayed in the Plaint.
- 3 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction and declaratory orders regarding ownership of the suit land.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Defendants, in their Defence, unequivocally admitted the Plaintiff's claim by stating they had voluntarily vacated the suit property and did not require court orders against them. There was no dispute left for trial as the Defendants had acknowledged the Plaintiff's ownership and possession of the land. Consequently, the court held that judgment on admission was appropriate and allowed the Plaintiff's application as prayed, granting the orders sought in the Plaint, including a permanent injunction and declaratory orders regarding ownership of parcel Matungulu/Kawethei/4667.
Court Disposition
application allowed; judgment entered for plaintiff on admission
Orders
- Judgment is entered against the Defendants jointly and severally on admission as prayed in the Plaint.
- The Defendants are permanently restrained from trespassing on parcel Matungulu/Kawethei/4667.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT MACHAKOS
ELC. CASE NO. 107 OF 2017
ALEXANDER KIMUYU NDUVA.....................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MICHAEL KAVITA NGEI.......................................1ST DEFENDANT
ANNASTACIA KALUKI NGEI.............................2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
1. In the Notice of Motion dated 19th April, 2017, the Plaintiff is seeking for the following orders:
a. That this Honourable Court be pleased to enter Judgment against the Defendants jointly and severally on admission as prayed in the Plaint.
b. That the costs of this suit and this Application be borne by the Defendants.
2. The Application is premised on the grounds that the Defendants have admitted the Plaintiff’s claim in their Defence and that there is nothing left for trial and Judgment should be entered as prayed.
3. In the Affidavit, the Plaintiff has deponed that in their Defence filed on 11th April, 2017, the Defendants have admitted the Plaintiff’s claim by stating that they have vacated the suit land.
4. Although the Defendants were served with the Application, the Defendants did not file a response.
5. In the submissions, the Plaintiff’s advocate submitted that the Plaintiff sued the Defendants seeking for an order of permanent injunction and declaratory orders that parcel number Matungulu/Kawethei/4667 is rightfully owned by the Plaintiff; that the Plaintiff is the registered owner of the land and that the Defendants admitted the Plaintiff’s claim in their Defence.
6. In the Plaint, the Plaintiff averred that he is the owner of parcel of land known as Matungulu/Kawethei/4667 measuring 0. 3Ha (the suit land); that the Defendants invaded the suit land on 14th July, 2014 and that the Defendants should be permanently restrained from trespassing on the land.
7. In their Defence, the Defendants averred that they entered into an agreement dated 14th July, 2014 with the Plaintiff’s wife for the purchase of the suit land; that they paid the Plaintiff’s wife Kshs. 90,000 for the land and that they took possession of the land as innocent purchasers for value.
8. The Defendants further averred that the Plaintiff’s wife and his son fraudulently misrepresented crucial facts over ownership of the suit land and “that the true and legal ownership of the suit property having been known to the Defendants, the Defendants do not require the courts orders prayed against them but have voluntarily left vacant possession the Plaintiff’s suit property.”
9. The Defendants have admitted in their Defence that they have voluntarily given vacant possession.
10. The Defendants have therefore unequivocally admitted the Plaintiff’s claim. For those reasons, Judgment on admission should be entered.
11. I therefore allow the Application dated 19th April, 2017 as prayed.
DATED, DELIVERED AND SIGNED IN MACHAKOS THIS 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2018.
O.A. ANGOTE
JUDGE