[2017] KEELC 226 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 226 (KLR)

The court adopted the consent of the parties, which was based on the District Surveyor's report dated 10:11:15, as the operative judgment in the matter. The parties agreed to a straight line boundary as described in the surveyor's report and map, resolving the dispute over the boundary between parcel No. 3301 and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 226 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: David Muriuki Kiugu; Defendant: Alex Mureithi Naaman
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 65 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Consent Judgment
Outcome
Suit settled by consent; judgment entered in terms of the District Surveyor's report; each party to bear own costs.
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Consent Judgment, Survey Reports
Source Language
en
Land and Property Boundary Disputes Consent Judgment Survey Reports

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Muriuki Kiugu

Plaintiff

Alex Mureithi Naaman

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Consent Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the boundary between parcel No. 3301 and 6281 should be determined as per the District Surveyor's report.
  2. 2 Whether the suit should be settled by consent of the parties as per the surveyor's findings.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the suit and the application dated 30:10:15.

Ratio Decidendi

The court adopted the consent of the parties, which was based on the District Surveyor's report dated 10:11:15, as the operative judgment in the matter. The parties agreed to a straight line boundary as described in the surveyor's report and map, resolving the dispute over the boundary between parcel No. 3301 and 6281. The application dated 30:10:15 and the plaint were marked as spent in terms of the prayers specified. The court determined that each party would bear their own costs, as agreed in the consent. The suit was marked as settled, and the consent was entered as the judgment of the court, thereby conclusively resolving the boundary dispute between the parties.

Court Disposition

Suit settled by consent; judgment entered in terms of the District Surveyor's report; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • Judgment is entered in terms of the District Surveyor's report dated 10:11:15, establishing a straight line boundary as described.
  • The application dated 30:10:15 is spent in terms of Prayer 1 and 2.