[2013] KEHC 5512 (KLR)
The court held that the consent between the plaintiffs and the defendant could be adopted as an order of the court, thereby settling the suit as between those parties. The absence of the Interested Party as a signatory to the consent does not preclude the plaintiffs and defendant from resolving their dispute,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 5512 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Edith Gaiti M'Mugambi; Plaintiff: Phylis Mwari Gituma; Plaintiff: Mary Nkatha Kiambi; Defendant: Moses Kithinji M'Mugambi; Defendant: Josphine Ndumba
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 72 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Adoption of Consent
- Outcome
- Consent between plaintiffs and defendant adopted as order of the court; suit settled as between those parties; Interested Party's claims preserved.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Consent Judgment, Settlement of Suit, Land Caveats, Court Orders on Land
- 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
Edith Gaiti M'Mugambi
Plaintiff
Phylis Mwari Gituma
Plaintiff
Mary Nkatha Kiambi
Plaintiff
Moses Kithinji M'Mugambi
Defendant
Josphine Ndumba
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Adoption of Consent
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the consent between the plaintiffs and the defendant can be adopted as an order of the court despite the Interested Party not being a signatory.
- 2 Whether existing caveats or court orders placed by the Interested Party should remain pending determination of her claims.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the consent between the plaintiffs and the defendant could be adopted as an order of the court, thereby settling the suit as between those parties. The absence of the Interested Party as a signatory to the consent does not preclude the plaintiffs and defendant from resolving their dispute, provided that any claims or rights asserted by the Interested Party are preserved and will be heard separately. Any caveats, cautions, or court orders placed on the subject land parcel by the Interested Party prior to the consent remain in force until her claims are determined. No order as to costs was made.
Court Disposition
Consent between plaintiffs and defendant adopted as order of the court; suit settled as between those parties; Interested Party's claims preserved.
Orders
- The consent between the plaintiffs and the defendant is adopted as an order of the court.
- The suit is settled as between the plaintiffs and the defendant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
CIVIL SUIT NO. 72 OF 2010
EDITH GAITI M'MUGAMBI....................................................................1ST PLAINTIFF
PHYLIS MWARI GITUMA....................................................................2ND PLAINTIFF
MARY NKATHA KIAMBI..................................................................... 3RD PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MOSES KITHINJI M'MUGAMBI....................................................1ST DEFENDANT
JOSPHINE NDUMBA....................................................................2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
A consent between the plaintiffs and the defendant was presented to the Court on 26. 4.2013. The plaintiffs and the defendant asked the Court to adopt it as an order of the Court.
I do note that the Interested Party was not party to the consent. I, however, find that this can not prevent the plaintiffs and the defendant from willingly deciding on how the suit as it concerns them can proceed.
I, therefore, adopt the consent as an order of this Court. This means that as between the plaintiffs and the defendant, this suit has been settled. The Interested Party will, however, have any claims she has against the plaintiffs and the defendant heard by the Court. If any of the inhibitions/caveats/cautions or any other Court orders placed against land parcel number NKUENE/KITHUNGURI/247 either in Civil Suit No.72 of 2010 or LDT No. 2 of 2009 had been obtained at the instance of the Interested Party before 11th April, 2013, the date on which the Consent was signed by the plaintiffs and the defendant, then they should remain in place pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
I make no order as to costs.
DELIVERED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2013 IN THE PRESENCE OF:
C c. Daniel
Mutuma present for plaintiffs
Firm of Gikunda Anampiu on record for 2nd defendants
2nd defendant present in person.
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE