[2023] KEELC 269 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 269 (KLR)

The court found that the originating summons raised serious triable issues, including whether the respondent had been in possession of the suit property and the nature of that occupation, as well as the manner in which the respondent entered the property in relation to the sale agreement. The court held that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 269 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Catholic Diocese of Eldoret; Defendant: Veronica Chepsat Sum
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E004 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Originating Summons
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
EO Obaga
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Locus Standi, Striking Out Pleadings, Sale of Land, Reasonable Cause of Action
Source Language
en
Land and Property Adverse Possession Locus Standi Striking Out Pleadings Sale of Land Reasonable Cause of Action

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Catholic Diocese of Eldoret

Plaintiff

Veronica Chepsat Sum

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Originating Summons

  1. 1 Whether the originating summons discloses a reasonable cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the originating summons is scandalous, frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of the court process.
  3. 3 Whether the concepts of adverse possession and sale can co-exist in the same suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the originating summons raised serious triable issues, including whether the respondent had been in possession of the suit property and the nature of that occupation, as well as the manner in which the respondent entered the property in relation to the sale agreement. The court held that striking out a pleading is a drastic measure reserved for the clearest of cases and that the issues raised could only be properly interrogated in a full hearing. The applicant's submissions were found to be premature and more appropriate for determination after a full trial. Consequently, the application to strike out the originating summons was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application dated 6/5/2022 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.