[2013] KEHC 1694 (KLR)
The court found that the interests of justice required the stay of proceedings in this suit pending the determination of the related judicial review application (JR No.6 of 2012). The substratum of the suit—the original land parcel—had been altered by subdivision, which was the subject of the judicial review. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 1694 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Ezekiel Kipkoech Rono; Plaintiff: Reuben Cheruiyot Yegon; Defendant: John Kipngetich Koech
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 96 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Stay of Proceedings
- Outcome
- Application for stay of proceedings granted.
- Judges
- L Waithaka
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Proceedings, Fraudulent Land Subdivision, Judicial Review Pending, Title Reversion, Abuse of Process
- 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
Ezekiel Kipkoech Rono
Plaintiff
Reuben Cheruiyot Yegon
Plaintiff
John Kipngetich Koech
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Stay of Proceedings
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proceedings in this suit should be stayed pending the determination of the related judicial review application (JR No.6 of 2012).
- 2 Whether the subdivision of the suit land during the pendency of the suit justifies a stay of proceedings.
- 3 Whether the plaintiffs are abusing the court process by seeking a stay after alleged delay.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the interests of justice required the stay of proceedings in this suit pending the determination of the related judicial review application (JR No.6 of 2012). The substratum of the suit—the original land parcel—had been altered by subdivision, which was the subject of the judicial review. The court exercised its discretion to stay the proceedings, noting that no prejudice would be suffered by the defendant and that the parties had largely complied with discovery. The stay would allow the judicial review process to resolve the status of the land, after which the current suit could proceed meaningfully if necessary.
Court Disposition
Application for stay of proceedings granted.
Orders
- Proceedings in this suit are stayed until the conclusion of JR No.6 of 2012.
- Costs of the application will be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
ELC SUIT NO. 96 OF 2012
EZEKIEL KIPKOECH RONO..............................1ST PLAINTIFF
REUBEN CHERUIYOT YEGON ………………2nd PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JOHN KIPNGETICH KOECH ............................. DEFENDANT
RULING
The applicants filed a Notice of Motion dated 14th May, 2013 seeking that the proceedings pending the hearing and determination of NAKURU HC MISC APPLICATION NO. 6 0F 2012(JR)
The application is supported by the affidavit of Rueben Cheruiyot Yegon and is premised on the grounds;
That the suit herein seeks declaratory and prohibitory orders over parcel No. Cis Mara/ llmotiok/195, previously registered in the name of the plaintiffs and the defendant
That during the subsistence of this case, filed in the year 2004, the defendant fraudulently caused the disputed land to be subdivided and new titles issued.
That the subdivision took place in the year 2006 and the plaintiff did file JR No.6 of 2012 challenging the subdivision.
That the said case is scheduled to be heard on 11th July, 2013.
That since the subject property is no longer in existence, it is prudent to await the outcome of the judicial review application so as to revert the land back to its original position.
A replying affidavit was filed in opposition to the application. The same was sworn by the defendant.
In a nutshell, the plaintiff states that during the pendency of this suit, the defendant went ahead and subdivided the suit land thereby rendering the prosecution of this suit a vain venture. The subdivision is alleged to have been done fraudulently. Upon discovering the same the plaintiffs instituted judicial review proceedings; being JR No.6 of 2012 seeking the reversal of the sub-division process. According to them; should they succeed the substratum of this suit will be restored.
According to the defendant, he disagrees with the plaintiff’s position. The plaintiffs should withdraw the suit, he says. Additionally the plaintiffs had been dragging their feet in prosecuting this matter and by now seeking to stay the proceedings, they are abusing the court process.
I note that parties have largely complied with discovery as required by the rules. This court has got inherent jurisdiction to stay proceedings when it considers that the interests of justice demand so; I have been informed of the judicial review proceedings and I think that the interests of justice demand that I exercise my discretion and stay those proceedings; at any rate I do not see what prejudice will be suffered by the defendants. Consequently, I direct that this proceedings be stayed until the conclusion of JR No.6 of 2012.
Costs of this application will be in the cause.
Dated Signed and delivered in open court this 20th day of September 2013.
L N WAITHAKA
JUDGE
Present
Mr Morindant for the plaintiffs
N/A for the defendants
Stephen Mwangi : Court Clerk
L N WAITHAKA
JUDGE