[2007] KEHC 1665 (KLR)

[2007] KEHC 1665 (KLR)

The court found that there was an error apparent on the face of the record in the judgment delivered on 6/6/2005. Although the appeal was allowed and the lower court's order was set aside, the judgment did not expressly award the appellant the 3 acres of land being Gaturi/Nembure/1776, which was the subject of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] KEHC 1665 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Ireri M’Meru; Respondent: Maitha Kang’ang’i
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 54 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Correct Judgment
Outcome
Application to correct judgment allowed.
Legal Topics
Correction of Judgment, Error on Face of Record, Confirmation of Grant, Distribution of Estate
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Correction of Judgment Error on Face of Record Confirmation of Grant Distribution of Estate

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ireri M’Meru

Appellant

Maitha Kang’ang’i

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Correct Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an error apparent on the face of the record in the judgment delivered on 6/6/2005.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to 3 acres of land being Gaturi/Nembure/1776.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was an error apparent on the face of the record in the judgment delivered on 6/6/2005. Although the appeal was allowed and the lower court's order was set aside, the judgment did not expressly award the appellant the 3 acres of land being Gaturi/Nembure/1776, which was the subject of the dispute. The court exercised its power under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act to correct the judgment so as to reflect the true intention of the court, namely, that the appellant is entitled to the distribution of the estate, specifically parcel No. Gaturi/Nembure/1776, and that the distribution set out in the certificate issued by the lower court on 1/8/2001 is set aside.

Court Disposition

Application to correct judgment allowed.

Orders

  • Paragraph 11 of the judgment is corrected to state that the order of the lower court is set aside, the distribution of the estate being parcel No. Gaturi/Nembure/1776 shall be to the appellant, and the distribution set out in the certificate issued by the lower court on 1/8/2001 is set aside.