[2016] KEHC 5876 (KLR)
The court held that since the plaintiff's suit had been dismissed, the caution registered against land parcel No. TIGANIA/TEA SCHEME/38 at the instance of the 1st plaintiff could not be allowed to subsist. The legal basis for the caution had ceased to exist, and it was both fair and just to order its removal. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 5876 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Erastus Mbaabu; Plaintiff: Anampiu Amuru alias Mulwa Amuru; Defendant: M'Mburugu M'Rinkanya; Defendant: Gatari Ringera
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 9 of 1987
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Post Dismissal Application for Removal of Caution
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Removal of Caution, Land Registration, Implementation of Court Orders
- 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
Erastus Mbaabu
Plaintiff
Anampiu Amuru alias Mulwa Amuru
Plaintiff
M'Mburugu M'Rinkanya
Defendant
Gatari Ringera
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Post Dismissal Application for Removal of Caution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the caution registered against land parcel No. TIGANIA/TEA SCHEME/38 should be removed following the dismissal of the plaintiff's case.
- 2 Whether it is fair and just to remove the caution after the suit has been dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that since the plaintiff's suit had been dismissed, the caution registered against land parcel No. TIGANIA/TEA SCHEME/38 at the instance of the 1st plaintiff could not be allowed to subsist. The legal basis for the caution had ceased to exist, and it was both fair and just to order its removal. The application was therefore allowed, and the caution ordered removed forthwith. Costs of the application were awarded to the 3rd defendant.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The caution registered against land parcel No. Tigania/Tea Scheme/38 at the instance of the 1st Plaintiff be removed forthwith.
- Costs of this application are awarded to the 3rd defendant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
CIVIL SUIT NO 9 OF 1987
ERASTUS MBAABU & ANOTHER...............................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
M'MBURUGU M'RINKANYA & 9 OTHERS ….......................DEFENDANTS
R U L I N G
This application is dated 30th July, 2014 and seeks orders that:-
The caution registered against land parcel No. TIGANIA/TEA SCHEME/38 at the instance of the 1st Plaintiff be removed.
1. Costs of this application be provided for.
The application is supported by the affidavit of Anampiu Amuru ALIAS Mulwa Amuru and has the following grounds:-
1. In view of the order of the dismissal of the Plaintiff's case the caution lodged against the suit land ought to be removed.
2. It is only fair and just that the said caution be removed.
This suit was dismissed by the Court on 20/03/2014.
I do note that the application is intended to implement the ruling of this Court. A Caution can not be allowed to subsist when the suit it had been predicated upon has already been dismissed.
It is noted that this application was served upon the respondent and he was in Court on 15/03/2016 when this matter was handled by this Court.
I allow the Application. I issue the following orders;-
1. The caution registered against land parcel No. Tigania/ Tea Scheme/38 at the instance of the 1st Plaintiff be removed forthwith.
2. Costs of this application are awarded to the 3rd defendant.
It is so ordered.
Delivered in Open Court at Meru this 16th day of March, 2016 in the presence of:-
CC:Daniel/Lilian
Gatari Ringera for 3rd Defendant
Erastus Mbaabu for the Plaintiff
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE