[2008] KEHC 3624 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant failed to produce credible and independent evidence to prove the existence of the alleged agreement to exchange trees. The testimonies of the appellant's witnesses were not independent, and the respondent's witnesses only provided hearsay evidence, which is inadmissible. There was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 3624 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Ita Mbariko; Respondent: Josphat Njiru Njoka
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 48 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Dismissal, Evidence Evaluation, Burden of Proof
- 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
Ita Mbariko
Appellant
Josphat Njiru Njoka
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there was sufficient evidence of an agreement to exchange trees between the parties.
- 2 Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the appellant's claim for lack of evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant failed to produce credible and independent evidence to prove the existence of the alleged agreement to exchange trees. The testimonies of the appellant's witnesses were not independent, and the respondent's witnesses only provided hearsay evidence, which is inadmissible. There was also no evidence presented regarding the value claimed by the appellant. Consequently, the court held that there was no basis to overturn the trial court's decision, and the appeal was dismissed for lack of evidence.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT EMBU
Civil Appeal 48 of 2004
ITA MBARIKO……………………………………………….APPELLANT
VERSUS
JOSPHAT NJIRU NJOKA…………..………………….RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
The appellant filed suit in Siakago SRM CC No. 4 of 2004. The suit was dismissed by the court. The Appellant has filed 6 grounds of appeal. The crucial evidence is of the agreement to exchange the trees. None of the Appellant’s witnesses were able to testify positively about the agreement alleged by the Appellant (Plaintiff). His witnesses were his son and nephew whose evidence the Trial Magistrate found not independent. The (defendants) Respondents witnesses are some of the elders who are said to have tried to resolve the case. They gave hearsay evidence on the agreement. Their evidence was hearsay and therefore unreliable. There was no evidence of the value claimed by the Appellant.
On the whole, I find no evidence was produced to warrant a decision for Appellant.
This Appeal is now dismissed.
Dated this 1st February, 2008.
J. N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE
1/2/2008
Khaminwa – Judge
Njue – Clerk
Mr. Ithiga HB
Read in open court.
J. N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE