[2014] KEHC 6168 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had formally proved her case by producing the title deed for parcel No. N.THARAKA/MARIMANTI/570, establishing her as the registered proprietor. The evidence showed that the road of access as reflected in the area map had been blocked or interfered with by the defendants. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 6168 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Janet Kamotho Peter; Defendant: Peter Kimathi; Defendant: Julia Kanyamu Karauki
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 51 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Judgment After Formal Proof
- Outcome
- Judgment for the plaintiff.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Right of Access, Permanent Injunction, Land Registration, Road of Access
- 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
Janet Kamotho Peter
Plaintiff
Peter Kimathi
Defendant
Julia Kanyamu Karauki
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment After Formal Proof
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an order permitting the District Land Registrars to open up a road of access to her land parcel as reflected in the area map.
- 2 Whether a permanent injunction should issue restraining the defendants from interfering with the road of access to the plaintiff's land.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs of the suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had formally proved her case by producing the title deed for parcel No. N.THARAKA/MARIMANTI/570, establishing her as the registered proprietor. The evidence showed that the road of access as reflected in the area map had been blocked or interfered with by the defendants. The defendants, having been properly served, failed to appear or defend the suit. The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to the orders sought, including the opening up of the road of access and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from further interference. Costs were also awarded to the plaintiff.
Court Disposition
Judgment for the plaintiff.
Orders
- An order directing the District Land Registrars Meru South/Maara/Tharaka Districts to visit land parcel Nos. N.THARAKA/MARIMANTI/565 and N.THARAKA/MARIMANTI/571 and open up the road of access to land parcel No. N.THARAKA/MARIMANTI/570 as reflected in the area map.
- A permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, servants, employees or anyone acting on their behalf from blocking, cultivating, erasing or tampering with the road of access to land parcel No. N.THARAKA/MARIMANTI/570.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
HCC 51 OF 2012
JANET KAMOTHO PETER..............................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
PETER KIMATHI...................................1ST DEFENDANT
JULIA KANYAMU KARAUKI.................2ND DEFENDANT
JUDGEMENT
In her plaint dated 23. 3.2012, the plaintiff prayed for judgment against the 1st and 2nd defendants jointly and severally for:
a) An order permitting the District Registrars from Meru South/Maara/ Tharaka Districts to visit land parcel Nos. N. THARAKA/ MARIMANTI/ 565 and N. THARAKA/MARIMANTI/571 and open up the road of access to land parcel No. N. THARAKA/MARIMANTI/570 as reflected in the area MAP held at the District Land Registry.
b) An order of a permanent injunction restraining both the 1st and 2nd defendants, by themselves, their agents, servants and/or employees or whomsoever else acting on behalf or instructions from blocking, cultivating, erasing or in any other manner whatsoever from tampering with the road of access from the main road to land parcel No.N.THARAKA/MARIMANT/570.
c) Costs of this suit and incidentals thereto.
d) Any other remedy the court may find fit and just to grant.
An Interlocutory Judgment was entered for the plaintiff against the defendants on 29. 8.12. I am satisfied that all along the defendants were properly served.
Formal proof proceedings took place on 17. 2. 2014. The plaintiff told the court that whenever the process servers served the defendants, they would thereafter insult her. She was of the view that they did not respect the court process and felt that that was why they were not in court for the formal proof proceedings.
The plaintiff produced the Title Deed for parcel No. N.THARAKA/MARIMANTI/570, measuring 1. 14 Ha, showing that she was the registered proprietor. The court confirmed that the land in dispute was registered in the name of the plaintiff.
I find that the plaintiff has formally proved her case.
In the circumstances, judgement is entered against the 1st and 2nd defendants in the following terms:
An order is issued directing the District Land registrar/s Meru South/Maara/Tharaka Districts to visit land parcel Nos. N.THARAKA/MARIMANTI/565 and N.THARAKA/ MARIMANTI/ 571 and to open up the road of access to land parcel No. N. THARAKA/MARIMANTI/570 as reflected in the Area Map held at the District Land Registry.
An order of a permanent injunction is issued restraining both the 1st and 2nd defendants by themselves, their agents, servants and/or employees and whomsoever else acting on their behalf or instructions from blocking, cultivating, erasing or in any other manner whatsoever from tampering with the Road of Access from the main road to land parcel NO. N. THARAKA/MARIMANTI/570.
Costs are awarded to the plaintiff.
The government officer in charge of survey in the area where the plaintiff's and the defendants' parcels of land are and the OCS or any other officer in charge of Police matters in the area to assist during the implementation of Order 1 above.
It is so ordered.
Delivered in Open Court at Meru this 20th day of March, 2014 in the presence of:
Cc. Mwonjaru
Janet Kamotho Peter - Plaintiff Present
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE