[2022] KEELC 736 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the suit property and that there is no pending litigation involving the land after the previous suit was dismissed. The caution registered by the 2nd respondent was therefore wrongful, as it was not supported by any ongoing dispute or legal interest. Both...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 736 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Fredrick David Muema; Respondent: Land Registrar Makueni; Respondent: Francis Muisyo Maitha
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Makueni
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 3 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Removal of Caution, Land Registration, Procedure for Service on Government, Damages for Wrongful Caution
- 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
Fredrick David Muema
Applicant
Land Registrar Makueni
Respondent
Francis Muisyo Maitha
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the caution registered by the 2nd respondent on land parcel Makueni/Unoa/2291 was wrongful.
- 2 Whether the respondents should be compelled to remove the caution on the applicant's land.
- 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to damages under Section 75 of the Land Registration Act for wrongful caution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the suit property and that there is no pending litigation involving the land after the previous suit was dismissed. The caution registered by the 2nd respondent was therefore wrongful, as it was not supported by any ongoing dispute or legal interest. Both respondents were served but failed to respond or oppose the application. The court held that the caution should be removed and that the applicant is entitled to the orders sought. The court also noted the procedural irregularity in service on the 1st respondent, a government officer, but this did not affect the substantive merits of the application since the respondents did...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The caution registered on 19th June, 2020 by the 2nd respondent is declared wrongful.
- The 1st and 2nd respondents are compelled to remove the caution lodged on land parcel No. Makueni/Unoa/2291 by the 2nd respondent on 19th June, 2020.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MAKUENI
MISC APPL NO. 3 OF 2020
FREDRICK DAVID MUEMA..........................................APPLICANT
-VERSUS-
LAND REGISTRAR MAKUENI.........................1ST RESPONDENT
FRANCIS MUISYO MAITHA...........................2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
1. What is before this court for ruling is the Notice of Motion application dated 7th July, 2020 and filed in court on 9th July, 2020 by the counsel for the applicant under certificate of urgency.
2. The application is expressed to be brought under Section 26 (1), 73(1) and 75 of the Land Registration Act, No. 3 of 2012, Laws of Kenya Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 Section 14 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and all enabling provisions of the law and the following orders are sought:-
1. Spent
2. That this Honourable court do make a finding that the registered caution registered on 19th June, 2020 by the 2nd respondent is wrongful and make a provision for damages consequently pursuant to Section 75 of The Land Registration Act, 2021, Laws of Kenya.
3. That this Honourable court do compel the 1st and 2nd respondents to remove the caution lodged on land parcel No. Makueni/Unoa/2291 by the 2nd respondent on 19th June, 2020.
4. Cost of the application be provided.
3. The application is predicated on the grounds on its face and is further supported by the affidavit of Fredrick David Mwema, the applicant herein, the same having been sworn at Machakos on 7th July, 2020.
4. The second respondent filed a notice of appointment of advocate on 28th September, 2020 the same being dated 24th September, 2020. He did not file any response to the application.
5. The 1st respondent though served did not enter appearance nor file any response.
6. On the 10th May, 2021 the applicant filed the affidavit of service sworn at Machakos on 7th May, 2021 by Benedict Muthama Mutua, a process server.
7. The application was canvassed by way of written submissions.
Before I evaluate the submissions filed by the applicant on 29th September, 2020 I wish to point out one or two issues about he first respondent who is a Government Officer. Service of this application ought to have been effected upon the Attorney General as is provided for under Section 13 of the Government Proceedings Act (Rev 2021) Cap 40 of the Laws of Kenya. I say so because the aforementioned affidavit of service indicates that it is the Land Registrar, Makueni who was served. For ease of reference Section 13 of the Government Proceedings Act provides as follows:-
“All documents required to be served on the Government for purposes of or in connection with any civil proceedings by or against the Government in accordance with the provisions of this Act shall be served on the Attorney General.”
8. I now turn to the application. The applicant has deposed inter alia that he is the registered owner of the parcel of land known as Makueni/Unoa/2291, that the second respondent has wrongfully registered a caution on the entire suit property and unsuccessfully instituted a suit against the applicant being Makueni ELC 287 of 2019, formerly Machakos ELC No. 217 of 2016 over the same suit land. That on 26th July, 2017 this court did impose a fine of kshs. 150,000/- upon the 2nd respondent for contempt of court orders of injunction against him, that thereafter the 2nd respondent attempted to reinstate the suit vide an application dated 10th September, 2019 but the same was dismissed with costs, that the respondents have been issued with letters directing them to remove the caution registered on the suit property but they have ignored and/or neglected to comply with the same, that on 22nd June, 2020 he applied for search on his parcel of land and it was confirmed that there is a registered caution by the 2nd respondent alleging that he has ownership interest on the same parcel of land, that the caution has made it impossible for the applicant to secure loans for developing the parcel of land and it is in the best interest of justice that the same is removed.
9. Having read the application together with the submissions filed by the applicant’s counsel and which submissions reiterate the averments by the applicant, I do note that there is no doubt that land parcel number Makueni/Unoa/2291 is registered in the name of Fredrick David Muema who is the applicant herein. There is no pending case involving the suit property after Makueni Elc 287 of 2017 was dismissed on 13th May, 2019 for want of prosecution. Attempt to reinstate the suit vide the Notice of Motion application dated 1st October, 2019 filed by the 2nd respondent herein was dismissed on 29th April, 2020. That being the case, I see no reason why the caution that was lodged in respect of land parcel number Makueni/Unoa/2291 should not be removed. Both the respondents were served with this application and they chose not to respond to it. As it were the application remains unopposed and same is allows as follows:-
2. This Honourable court has made a finding that the registered caution registered on 19th June, 2020 by the 2nd respondent is wrongful.
3. That this Honourable court hereby compels the 1st and 2nd respondents to remove the caution lodged on land parcel No. Makueni/Unoa/2291 by the 2nd respondent on 19th June, 2020.
4. Cost of the application be provided.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA EMAIL ON THIS 22ND MARCH, 2022.
Mbogo C.G
Judge
22/3/2022
In the presence of: -
CA: T.Chuma