https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4852
The applicant failed to demonstrate any concrete attempts to trace or personally serve the 1st Defendant. Because substituted service is a last resort, the court declined to authorize newspaper advertisement and dismissed the motion to protect the 1st Defendant’s right to fair hearing and avoid future setting aside...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEELC 4852 (KLR)
- Parties
- 1st Plaintiff/applicant: Philemon Irungu Kibiru; 1st Defendant/respondent: Samuel Mburu Muchoki (Being sued as the Administrator of the Estate of Beatrice Wangui Muchoki-deceased); 2nd Defendant/respondent: The Land Registrar Murang’a; 3rd Defendant/respondent: The Honourable Attorney General
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Land Case E030 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Court Civil Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Substituted Service
- Outcome
- Notice of motion dismissed
- Judges
- ["MN Gicheru"]
- Legal Topics
- Substituted Service, Service of Summons, Fair Hearing, Natural Justice, Procedural Fairness
- 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
Philemon Irungu Kibiru
1st Plaintiff/applicant
Samuel Mburu Muchoki (Being sued as the Administrator of the Estate of Beatrice Wangui Muchoki-deceased)
1st Defendant/respondent
The Land Registrar Murang’a
2nd Defendant/respondent
The Honourable Attorney General
3rd Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Court Civil Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Substituted Service
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should allow substituted service of summons on the 1st Defendant by newspaper advertisement.
- 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient efforts to trace and personally serve the 1st Defendant.
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant failed to demonstrate any concrete attempts to trace or personally serve the 1st Defendant. Because substituted service is a last resort, the court declined to authorize newspaper advertisement and dismissed the motion to protect the 1st Defendant’s right to fair hearing and avoid future setting aside of judgment for non-service.
Court Disposition
Notice of motion dismissed
Orders
- The notice of motion dated 7-7-2026 is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
 **REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MURANG’A** **ELCLC E030 OF 2026** **PHILEMON IRUNGU KIBIRU……………………….……..............1ST PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT** **VERSUS** **SAMUEL MBURU MUCHOKI(Being sued as the Administrator of the Estate of** **BEATRICE WANGUI MUCHOKI-DECEASED).........................1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT** **THE LAND REGISTRAR MURANG’A………...........................2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT** **THE HONOURABLE ATTORNEY GENERAL..........................3RD DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT** **RULING** 1. This ruling is on the notice of motion dated 7-7-2026. The motion which is brought under **Orders 5 rule 17, 51 rule of the Civil Procedure Rules** and all other enabling provisions of the law seeks one main order. 2. **The 1st Defendant/Respondent Samuel Mburu Muchoki be served with summons to enter appearance through substituted service by way of an advertisement in the local newspapers.** 3. The motion is based on two (2) grounds and it is supported by an affidavit sworn by the Plaintiff’s Counsel. The gist of the grounds and the affidavit is as follows. One, the 1st Defendant is not known to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff only came to know of the existence of the 1st Defendant in case No. 311 of 2009 filed at Thika. Secondly, all efforts to effect service upon him have not been successful because his places of residence and work are unknown. Finally, the only option left is to serve the 1st Defendant through substituted service. 4. I have carefully considered the motion including the grounds and the affidavit and I find that more effort should be made to trace the 1st Defendant and serve him physically. Neither the affidavit nor the grounds bring out even a single incident of any attempt to trace the 1st Defendant. Service through newspapers should be the last resort. 5. From the pleadings, the Plaintiff has brought out a picture of procedural unfairness visited upon him and the person who sold the suit land to him. If this Court proceeded without the first Defendant being served physically this Court would also be accused of the same procedural unfairness that brought about this case. Article 50(1) of the Constitution commands that every person be given a fair hearing. Fair hearing should start with good service otherwise the 1st Defendant may be condemned unheard. In the final analysis, justice will be served better and faster if every effort is made to serve the 1st Defendant physically because there will be no possibility of the final judgment being set aside on grounds of non service. For the above stated reasons, I **dismiss** the notice of motion dated 7-7-2026. **Dated, signed and delivered virtually at Murang’a this 28th day of July, 2026.** **M. N. GICHERU** **JUDGE** **Delivered online in the presence of:-** **Court Assistant – Antony** **Plaintiff’s Counsel – Mrs Njomo.**