[2022] KEELC 3529 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's request to amend the originating summons was merited because the amendment merely sought to correct the description of the suit property and did not introduce a new cause of action. The court held that the respondent would not suffer any prejudice that could not be compensated by...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 3529 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Patrick Baraza Kidula; Defendant: Caroline Opondo
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 58 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application to Amend Originating Summons
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- EO Obaga
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Pleadings, Description of Suit Property, Prejudice and Costs
- 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
Patrick Baraza Kidula
Plaintiff
Caroline Opondo
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application to Amend Originating Summons
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to amend the originating summons to correct the description of the suit property.
- 2 Whether the proposed amendment would prejudice the respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's request to amend the originating summons was merited because the amendment merely sought to correct the description of the suit property and did not introduce a new cause of action. The court held that the respondent would not suffer any prejudice that could not be compensated by an award of costs. Denying the amendment would be contrary to the overriding objective of the court, as it would force the applicant to withdraw the suit and file a fresh one, resulting in unnecessary delay and expense. Accordingly, the court allowed the amendment and ordered the applicant to pay the respondent costs.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The applicant is granted leave to amend the originating summons.
- The applicant shall file an amended originating summons within 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
Kidula v Opondo (Environment & Land Case 58 of 2020) [2022] KEELC 3529 (KLR) (18 May 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELC 3529 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Environment & Land Case 58 of 2020
EO Obaga, J
May 18, 2022
Between
Patrick Baraza Kidula
Plaintiff
and
Caroline Opondo
Defendant
Ruling
1. This is a ruling in respect of a notice of motion dated March 10, 2021 in which the applicant seeks leave to amend the originating summons. The applicant contends that at the time he filed the originating summons herein, he indicated the parcel Numbers as 8451/15 and 8451/16 measuring 14 acres instead of Pioneer/Ngeria Block 1 (Eatec) 6060 measuring 1. 2 hectares. He states that this was due to inadvertence. He further states that the amendment will not prejudice the respondent in any way as a party is at liberty to amend his/her pleadings before judgment.
2. The respondent opposed the applicant’s application based on a replying affidavit sworn on November 15, 2021. The respondent states that the amendment was prompted by her replying affidavit to the originating summons. The respondent further contends that the applicant is seeking to change the substratum of his claim instead of filing a fresh suit and withdrawing the present one.
3. I have considered the applicant’s application as well as the opposition thereto by the respondent. I have also considered the submissions by the parties. The only issue for determination is whether the applicant has shown that there is need to be allowed to amend the originating summons. The law on amendment of pleadings is that amendments sought should be freely allowed if they cannot cause any prejudice to the other party and where the other party can be compensated by costs. See Central Kenya Limited –vs- Trust Bank Kenya Limited & 5 others(2000) eKLR.
4. In the instant case, the applicant had based his claim on Land reference Nos. 8451/15 and 8451/16. When the Respondent filed a replying affidavit and indicated that her land is Pioneer Ngeria Block 1 (Eatec) 6060, it became necessary for the applicant to amend the originating summons. The amendment is not introducing any new cause of action. It is merely seeking to correct the description of the suit property. This amendment will not prejudice the respondent in any way. It will not be in keeping with the overriding objective of the court to deny the applicant amendment forcing him to withdraw the suit and file a fresh one. The respondent can be compensated by an award of costs. I therefore find that the applicant’s application is merited. I allow it and direct that the applicant files an amended originating summons within 14 days. The Applicant shall pay the Respondent costs of Kshs 15,000/=It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET ON THIS 18TH DAY OFMAY,2022. E. OBAGAJUDGEIn the virtual presence of;Ms. Too for defendantMs. Odwa for RespondentCourt Assistant –AlbertE. OBAGAJUDGE18TH MAY, 2022**