[2017] KEELC 1813 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 1813 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiffs had not established a clear prima facie case for the exhumation of Ndambuki Kaveke from Plot No. 317 because the ownership of the suit land was disputed and could only be determined at trial. The court noted that both parties relied on share certificates, one of which appeared to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 1813 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Daniel Kimanthi Mutisya; Plaintiff: Josephat Waita Mutisya (suing on behalf and beneficiaries of the estate of Ndunda Waita – deceased); Defendant: The Chairman; Defendant: The Secretary; Defendant: The Treasurer; Defendant: Mwea Farmers Co. Limited
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 168 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Chamber Summons / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Ownership Dispute, Exhumation Orders, Land Registration, Beneficiaries Rights
Source Language
en
Land and Property Ownership Dispute Exhumation Orders Land Registration Beneficiaries Rights

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Kimanthi Mutisya

Plaintiff

Josephat Waita Mutisya (suing on behalf and beneficiaries of the estate of Ndunda Waita – deceased)

Plaintiff

The Chairman

Defendant

The Secretary

Defendant

The Treasurer

Defendant

Mwea Farmers Co. Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chamber Summons / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiffs have established a prima facie case for the exhumation of Ndambuki Kaveke from Plot No. 317.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiffs have demonstrated legal ownership of Plot No. 317.
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to orders for possession and exhumation before determination of ownership at trial.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiffs had not established a clear prima facie case for the exhumation of Ndambuki Kaveke from Plot No. 317 because the ownership of the suit land was disputed and could only be determined at trial. The court noted that both parties relied on share certificates, one of which appeared to be a forgery, and that the receipts and share certificates presented by the Plaintiffs did not specify the parcel of land allocated to Ndunda Waita. Furthermore, the Plaintiffs had not joined the legal representatives of Ndambuki Kaveke, whose remains they sought to exhume, as parties to the suit. The court held that until the issue of ownership is resolved and the proper...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The Chamber Summons dated 24th October, 2016 is dismissed with costs to the Defendants.