[2019] KEELC 3622 (KLR)
The court found that the main reason for the application was that the matter had been heard in Meru and was only pending judgment. However, since the magistrates who heard the case at Meru were no longer stationed there, any retransfer would result in a new magistrate handling the matter regardless of location....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 3622 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Alice Karuta Muchena; Applicant: Mark Anthony Mwenda; Applicant: Freda Kagwiria; Applicant: Racheal Nkatha; Applicant: Janice Kathure; Respondent: Zakayo Muchena; Respondent: Anthony Kaunga
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 7 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Retransfer of Suit for Judgment Writing
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Transfer of Suit, Jurisdiction of Court, Judgment Writing, Adjudication Section
- 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
Alice Karuta Muchena
Applicant
Mark Anthony Mwenda
Applicant
Freda Kagwiria
Applicant
Racheal Nkatha
Applicant
Janice Kathure
Applicant
Zakayo Muchena
Respondent
Anthony Kaunga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Retransfer of Suit for Judgment Writing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be retransferred from Tigania Law Court to Meru Law Courts for judgment writing.
- 2 Whether the Meru Law Courts retain jurisdiction or capacity to finalize the matter given the departure of the original magistrates.
- 3 Whether the location of the suit land within Kianjai adjudication section affects the proper forum for the case.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the main reason for the application was that the matter had been heard in Meru and was only pending judgment. However, since the magistrates who heard the case at Meru were no longer stationed there, any retransfer would result in a new magistrate handling the matter regardless of location. Additionally, the respondents' assertion that the suit land is within Kianjai adjudication section, and thus within Tigania's jurisdiction, was not rebutted by the applicants. Retransferring the file would therefore not serve the interests of justice and would only create further procedural hurdles. The application was dismissed as it would not facilitate the finalization of the case.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 5.2.2019 is dismissed.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
ELC MISC. NO. 7 OF 2019
ALICE KARUTA MUCHENA...................1ST APPLICANT
MARK ANTHONY MWENDA.................2ND APPLICANT
FREDA KAGWIRIA..................................3RD APPLICANT
RACHEAL NKATHA............................... 4TH APPLICANT
JANICE KATHURE..................................5TH APPLICANT
VERSUS
ZAKAYO MUCHENA.......................... 1ST RESPONDENT
ANTHONY KAUNGA............................2ND RSPONDENT
RULING
1. In the application dated 5. 2.2019 the applicants are seeking orders that:
(i) Spent.
(ii) Tigania PMCC No. 49 of 2017 (formerly CMCC NO. 199 of 2011) between the applicants herein as the plaintiff and the respondents herein as the defendant therein, be withdrawn from the Tigania principal Magistrate’s court and be retransferred back to Meru Law Courts for judgment writing.
(iii) Costs of this application be in the cause.
2. The grounds in support of the application are that;
(i) The said case was mistakenly transferred to Tigania Law Court, yet the matter had been fully heard by the Chief Magistrate’s Court Meru and was awaiting judgment to be written.
(ii) For judgment to be written, it is only fair that the same be written in Meru.
3. There is also a supporting affidavit sworn by counsel for the applicants.
4. The two respondents have filed replying affidavits in opposition to the application, where they aver that the suit land is situated in Kianjai adjudication section which is within the jurisdiction of Tigania Court. They also aver that the magistrates who heard the case in Meru Chief Magistrate’s court have already left the station (at Meru).
5. I have perused this file and I find that the main reason as to why applicant is seeking for the retransfer of the file back to Meru CMCC court is because matter was heard in Meru and was only pending judgment writing.
6. However, it has emerged that the case was heard by Honourable D.O Onyango and Honourable C. Kutwa. These magistrates are no longer in the station at Meru law Court. It follows that even if the file was to be re-transferred back to Meru, the matter would be handled by a new magistrate.
7. It has also been alleged by the respondents that the suit land falls within Kianjai adjudication section which is in Tigania. Applicants have not rebutted that averment.
8. It follows that allowing the application would in essence create more hurdles in the finalization of the case.
9. This application is hence dismissed with no orders as to costs.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
C/A: Kananu
Miss Munga for applicant
C.P Mbaabu holding brief for Nyamu Nyaga for respondent
2nd respondent
HON. LUCY. N. MBUGUA
ELC JUDGE