[2008] KEHC 1804 (KLR)
The court found that the proposed new defendants had been alleged to trespass on the suit land, which is the subject of the ongoing litigation for adverse possession. Their joinder was necessary to ensure that all parties with an interest or involvement in the dispute are before the court, enabling a comprehensive...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 1804 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Kiilu Nduva Makite & 44 Others; Defendant: Lukenya Ranching & Farming Co-operative Society
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 560 of 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Enjoin Further Defendants
- Outcome
- Application to enjoin further defendants allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Injunctions, Joinder of Parties, Trespass
- 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
Kiilu Nduva Makite & 44 Others
Plaintiff
Lukenya Ranching & Farming Co-operative Society
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Enjoin Further Defendants
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proposed new defendants should be enjoined to the suit as parties for alleged trespass on the suit land.
- 2 Whether the existing injunctive orders should apply to the newly enjoined defendants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the proposed new defendants had been alleged to trespass on the suit land, which is the subject of the ongoing litigation for adverse possession. Their joinder was necessary to ensure that all parties with an interest or involvement in the dispute are before the court, enabling a comprehensive and binding determination. The absence of opposition or reply from the respondents further supported the grant of the application. The court therefore allowed the application to enjoin the new defendants, directed them to file their replying affidavit within 30 days, and permitted the applicants to file a corresponding reply. The matter was to proceed to discovery, pre-trial...
Court Disposition
Application to enjoin further defendants allowed.
Orders
- The proposed new defendants are enjoined to the suit.
- The newly enjoined defendants to file their replying affidavit within 30 days of the ruling date.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
Civil Case 560 of 2000
KIILU NDUVA MAKITE & 44 OTHERS …………… PLAINTIFFS
VERSUS
LUKENYA RANCHING &
FARMING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIEITY ……...…….. DEFENDANT
RULING
APPLICATION TO ENJOIN FUTHER DEFENANTS
TO THE SUIT 22 JANUARY 2008
I: Background
1. The main subject of this suit is Land. LR10501/2 Athi River and LR8529/4 Machakos that had been purchased by the defendants herein M/s Lukenya Ranching and Farming Co-operative Society Ltd sometime in 1970. (herein referred to as the society).
2. The society sub-divided the land and distributed it to their members. They found the plaintiffs allegedly on the land as squatters (which is denied by them and is subject to a hearing in a trial). An attempt to evict them culminated to several suit being filed between the parties (being Resident Magistrates Criminal Court case 1979; Hccc 1253/80 (OS); Hccc 377/89; Hccc 97/77).
3. There is a possibility the parties in some of the suits may not be the same.
4. When this current suit was filed, for adverse possession, the 45 plaintiffs successfully applied for an injunction restraining the society from evicting them and or interfering with their quite possession of the suit land (Gacheche J 19. 9.01).
5. Contempt proceedings were dismissed on 7. 2.03 (Hayanga J) and injunctive orders extended till the finalization of the suit Ransely J (14. 7.05).
6. No hearing has been conducted although directions as to the mode of hearing the originating summons was given by
Githinji J (as he then was) (8 June 2000).
II: Application 22 January 2008
7. The plaintiff contend that the proposed new defendants have in effect trespassed on the land. They pray that the defendant so proposed be enjoined to this suit be liable subject then to orders already existing on the court file on the injunction.
8. The proposed defendants appointed an advocate. Consent dates for hearing the application of 22 January 2000 was taken by the two advocates for the parties but the respondent failed to attend court. There was no rely filed by the respondents.
9. This court allows the application and accordingly enjoins the said respondents to this suit. That they file their replying affidavit within 30 days of to days date. The applicants be permitted to file a corresponding reply.
10 The parties are to then proceed to do discovery and hold pre-trial conference then set this matter down for hearing subject to any pending applications.
11. Costs to the applicant.
DATED THIS 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2008 AT NAIROBI.
M.A. ANG’AWA
JUDGE
R.N. Mungao instructed by Ochanda Onguru & Co. Advocates for the plaintiff
M/s Ngolya instructed by Ngolya & Co. Advocates for the plaintiff/respondent