[1996] KECA 133 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal held that the High Court erred in dismissing the suit on a preliminary point of law without evidence or findings as to when the appellant's possession became adverse or when the suit became time barred. The court emphasized that preliminary objections should only be raised on pure points of law...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1996] KECA 133 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Eunice Karimi Kibunja; Respondent: Mwirigi M'Ringera Kibunja
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 103 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal_allowed
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Limitation of Actions, Preliminary Objection
- 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
Eunice Karimi Kibunja
Appellant
Mwirigi M'Ringera Kibunja
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit for adverse possession was time barred under the Limitation of Actions Act.
- 2 Whether a preliminary objection could be sustained without ascertaining relevant facts.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal held that the High Court erred in dismissing the suit on a preliminary point of law without evidence or findings as to when the appellant's possession became adverse or when the suit became time barred. The court emphasized that preliminary objections should only be raised on pure points of law and not where facts need to be ascertained. Since the issue of limitation required factual determination, the matter should have proceeded to a full hearing. The appeal was therefore allowed, the dismissal set aside, and the case remitted to the High Court for hearing on its merits.
Court Disposition
appeal_allowed
Orders
- The appeal is allowed with costs here and in the court below.
- The case is remitted to the superior court for hearing on its merits.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NYERI CIVIL APPEAL NO. 103 OF 1996 CORAM: GICHERU, KWACH & LAKHA, JJ.A.
BETWEEN
EUNICE KARIMI KIBUNJA ...............................APPELLANT AND MWIRIGI M'RINGERA KIBUNJA ...........................RESPONDENT
(Appeal from a ruling and decree of the High Court of Kenya at Meru (Kuloba J) dated 4th March, 1993 in H.C.C.C. NO. 126 OF 1992) *****************
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
This is an appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiff whose suit by way of an originating summons was dismissed by the superior court (Kuloba, J.) by his ruling delivered on March 4, 1993 on a so called preliminary point of law that the suit was time barred.
By her originating summons the plaintiff claimed a declaration that she had become entitled by adverse possession to 5 acres out of a parcel of land ABOTHUGUCHA/GITHONGO/494. Without any evidence or finding as to when the possession by the plaintiff became adverse to that of the defendant or when the suit became barred by limitation, the judge dismissed the plaintiff's suit.
We have carefully considered the appellant's complaint and find that the complaint is fully justified. The issue before court clearly required a full hearing and we reiterate that the practice of raising points, which should be argued in the normal manner, by way of preliminary objection does nothing but unnecessarily increase costs and, on occasion, confuse the issues. A preliminary point cannot be raised if any fact has to be ascertained.
Accordingly and, for the reasons above stated, the appeal is allowed with costs here and in the court below and the case is remitted to the superior court for hearing on its merits.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 16th day of October, 1996.
J. E. GICHERU
---------------
JUDGE OF APPEAL
R. O. KWACH
---------------
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A. A. LAKHA
---------------
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR