[2020] KEELC 3537 (KLR)
The court found that the interested party had succeeded in the relevant adjudication objection proceedings regarding the subject land parcels, and that the ex parte applicant's judicial review application challenging those decisions was dismissed with costs. No stay of execution or other bar remained in place. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 3537 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joram Kaberia; Respondent: District Land Adjudication & Settlement Officer, Igembe South District; Respondent: Land Adjudication Committee Akirangondu “A” Adjudication Section; Interested Party: Julius Theuri
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 16 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Ruling on Post Judgment Application for Vacant Possession and Eviction
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Adjudication Objections, Vacant Possession, Eviction Orders, Judicial Review Dismissal
- 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
Joram Kaberia
Applicant
District Land Adjudication & Settlement Officer, Igembe South District
Respondent
Land Adjudication Committee Akirangondu “A” Adjudication Section
Respondent
Julius Theuri
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Post Judgment Application for Vacant Possession and Eviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the interested party is entitled to vacant possession and eviction orders over the specified land parcels after the dismissal of the judicial review application.
- 2 Whether there is any legal bar to granting the orders sought by the interested party.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the interested party had succeeded in the relevant adjudication objection proceedings regarding the subject land parcels, and that the ex parte applicant's judicial review application challenging those decisions was dismissed with costs. No stay of execution or other bar remained in place. The application for vacant possession and eviction was unopposed by both the ex parte applicant and the respondents, who were duly served. The court held that there was no legal impediment to granting the orders sought, and that the interested party was entitled to vacant possession and, if necessary, eviction of the ex parte applicant and his agents from the specified land parcels....
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The ex parte applicant/respondent, his heirs, assigns, agents, and family members to give vacant possession of Land Parcels No. 1516, 9603, 5043, and 5044 Akirangondu “A” Adjudication Section to the interested party/applicant; in default, forcible eviction to issue.
- The O.C.S. Kangeta Police Station to provide security to ensure compliance.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
ELC JR NO. 16 OF 2017
JORAM KABERIA........................................EXPARTE APPLICANT
VERSUS
DISTRICT LAND ADJUDICATION & SETTLEMENT OFFICER,
IGEMBE SOUTH DISTRICT..............................1ST RESPONDENT
LAND ADJUDICATION COMMITTEE AKIRANGONDU
“A” ADJUDICATION SECTION.......................2ND RESPONDENT
JULIUS THEURI.............................................INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
1. The interested party filed the application dated 8/10/2019 seeking the following orders;
(i) That this honourable Court do order the exparte Applicant/Respondent, his heirs, assigns, agents and his family members to give vacant possession of Land Parcels No. 1516, 9603, 5043 and 5044 Akirangondu “A” Adjudication Section situated at Anjalu area within Meru County to the interested party/ applicant and in default , he be forcibly evicted.
(ii) That the O.C.S. Kangeta Police Station to provide security to ensure compliance.
2. The application was supported by the annexed affidavit of the applicant and on the grounds that;
a. The land belonged to the interested party/applicant.
b. The interested party successfully lodged A/R Objections (sic) No. 810, 811,812,813, 841,815 and 2301 Akirangondu “A” Adjudication Section over land parcels 1516, 9603, 5043 and 5044 and the decision was made in his favour on 13/12/2011.
c. That the ex-parte applicant then filed this Judicial review suit against the interested party and two others challenging the decision in the A/R Objection and the same was dismissed with costs on 22/6/2018.
d. That the applicant ought to resume possession of his land Parcel after this judicial review was dismissed with cost on 22/6/2018.
3. The application has not been opposed by the Exparte applicant who was duly served. Further, the Attorney General through the state counsel had indicated that they would not oppose the application (see proceedings of 25. 11. 2019).
4. Vide the Judgment of this court delivered on 22/06/2018, ex-part applicant’s notice of motion dated 28/11/2012 was dismissed on the basis that applicant did not demonstrate that there was want of jurisdiction or lack of natural justice in the process that gave rise to the impugned decision. The court also held that these proceedings were incompetent and time barred since only one administrator out of the two administrators appointed to administer the estate of the deceased M’Mibuari M’Mibuari was made an applicant instead of both of them. The orders of stay were also vacated, hence the decision in the objection proceedings still stands.
5. The application is un-opposed and there is nothing barring this court from issueing the orders sought. The application dated 8/10/2019 is therefore allowed with each party bearing their own costs..
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 19TH FEBRUARY, 2020 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
C/A: Kananu
Muthomi J. fpr Exparte Applicant
AG for 1st and 2nd respondent
Interested party (Julius)
Exparte applicant
HON. LUCY. N. MBUGUA
ELC JUDGE