[2021] KEELC 891 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 891 (KLR)

The court found that the inhibition orders were tied to the existence of Tigania CC No. 101 of 2005, which had been dismissed. According to Section 70 of the Land Registration Act, inhibitions may be lifted upon the expiration of the time stated or by a court order. Since the suit was dismissed, the basis for the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELC 891 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Julius Nturibi Rukaria; Applicant: Mary Ncekei Kirianki; Respondent: M’Rukaria M’Nkubitu
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E30 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Lift Inhibition Orders
Outcome
Application allowed; inhibition orders lifted.
Legal Topics
Inhibition Orders, Land Registration, Vacation of Interim Orders, Res Judicata
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Inhibition Orders Land Registration Vacation of Interim Orders Res Judicata

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julius Nturibi Rukaria

Applicant

Mary Ncekei Kirianki

Applicant

M’Rukaria M’Nkubitu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Lift Inhibition Orders

  1. 1 Whether inhibition orders registered against the specified land parcels should be lifted following the dismissal of the underlying suit.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have taken the necessary steps to have the inhibition orders removed administratively before seeking court intervention.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the inhibition orders were tied to the existence of Tigania CC No. 101 of 2005, which had been dismissed. According to Section 70 of the Land Registration Act, inhibitions may be lifted upon the expiration of the time stated or by a court order. Since the suit was dismissed, the basis for the inhibition ceased to exist. Although the applicants had not demonstrated that they had first approached the Land Registrar with a certified copy of the decree, the court, exercising its discretion under Sections 1A, 1B, and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, determined that it was in the interest of justice to lift the inhibition orders due to the effluxion of time and the settlement...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; inhibition orders lifted.

Orders

  • The inhibition orders registered against Parcels No’s Nyaki/Giaki/2624 and 2625 and Nyaki/Thuura/3182, 3183, 3184 & 3185 are hereby lifted.