[2020] KEELC 1883 (KLR)
The court found that the plaint did not disclose any cause of action against the 1st defendant, as the plaintiff's complaint was solely against the 2nd defendant regarding the renewal of the lease. The plaintiff failed to demonstrate any wrongdoing or legal obligation on the part of the 1st defendant that would...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 1883 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Gerald Mbagha Mwaviswa; Defendant: Nairobi City County; Defendant: National Land Commission
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 644 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Chamber Summons Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Party
- Outcome
- application allowed; 1st defendant struck out of the suit
- Legal Topics
- Joinder of Parties, Cause of Action, Renewal of Lease, Ownership Disputes
- 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
Gerald Mbagha Mwaviswa
Plaintiff
Nairobi City County
Defendant
National Land Commission
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Chamber Summons Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Party
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st defendant was wrongly joined as a party to the suit.
- 2 Whether the plaint discloses a reasonable cause of action against the 1st defendant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaint did not disclose any cause of action against the 1st defendant, as the plaintiff's complaint was solely against the 2nd defendant regarding the renewal of the lease. The plaintiff failed to demonstrate any wrongdoing or legal obligation on the part of the 1st defendant that would justify its continued joinder in the suit. Consequently, the court held that the 1st defendant was wrongly joined and allowed the application to strike out the 1st defendant from the proceedings.
Court Disposition
application allowed; 1st defendant struck out of the suit
Orders
- The 1st defendant, Nairobi City County, is struck out of the suit.
- No cause of action is disclosed against the 1st defendant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NAIROBI
ELC SUIT NO. 644 OF 2017
GERALD MBAGHA MWAVISWA.....................PLAINTIFF
=VERSUS=
NAIROBI CITY COUNTY.........................1ST DEFENDANT
NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION.........2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
What is before me is the 1st defendant’s Chamber Summons application dated 25th June, 2018 brought under Order 1 Rule 10(2) and (14) of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking an order that the 1st defendant be struck out of the suit. The application was brought on the ground that the 1st defendant was wrongly joined in the suit and that the plaintiff has no cause of action against the 1st defendant. The application was opposed by the plaintiff through a replying affidavit filed on 10th February, 2020. The plaintiff contended that the plaint raises a reasonable cause of action against the 1st defendant and that the application was an abuse of the process of the court. The plaintiff averred that the 1st defendant had a statutory role to play in the implementation of the reliefs sought in the plaint and as such it ought to remain as a party to the suit.
The application was heard on 10th February, 2020. I have considered the application together with the affidavit filed in opposition thereto by the plaintiff. In his plaint dated 11th September, 2017, the plaintiff averred that one, Himatlal Nandilal Bhatt had given him all that parcel of land known as L.R No. 209/1971/1, I.R 28194 (“the suit property”) as a gift in 2003. The plaintiff averred that the suit property was a leasehold from the Government of the Republic of Kenya. The plaintiff averred that the lease for the suit property expired on 31st October, 2003. The plaintiff averred that it applied to the 2nd defendant for the extension of the said lease but the 2nd defendant had failed to do so. The plaintiff sought judgment against the 1st and 2nd defendants for;
(i) A declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit property.
(ii) An order compelling the 1st and 2nd defendants to renew the lease in respect of the suit property forthwith.
I am in agreement with the 1st defendant that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action against the 1st defendant. The plaintiff’s complaint concerns the refusal by the 2nd defendant to renew the lease for the suit property. The plaintiff has stated that it is the 2nd defendant that has the mandate of renewing the said lease. The plaintiff has not mentioned any wrong that has been done by the 1st defendant to warrant its joinder to this suit. It is therefore my finding that the 1st defendant has been wrongly joined in the suit.
The upshot of the foregoing is that 1st defendant’s application dated 25th June, 2018 has merit. The application is allowed as prayed.
Delivered and Dated at Nairobi this 25th Day of June 2020
S. OKONG’O
JUDGE
Ruling delivered virtually through Microsoft Teams video conferencing platform in in the presence of:
The Plaintiff present in person
Ms. Munyasia for the 1st Defendant
Ms. Masinde for 2nd Defendant
Ms. C. Nyokabi-Court Assistant