[2011] KEHC 818 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 818 (KLR)

The court found that the suit had already been dismissed as res judicata and that the orders previously granted did not mention or relate to any caution registered against the subject land titles. Since the existence and removal of the caution were not addressed in the dismissed suit or in the orders of 9th...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KEHC 818 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kiptoo Arap Chelule; Defendant: Jerop Taprandich Ngetich; Defendant: Selly Jepkirong Ngetich; Defendant: Christopher Bett; Defendant: Samuel Kiplimo Bett; Defendant: Ruth Jepkoech Ngetich; Defendant: John Kipkemei Cheptarbei; Defendant: P.K. Sibuchi, District Lands Registrar
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 200 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Orders
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Interlocutory Injunctions, Land Cautions, Setting Aside Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Res Judicata Interlocutory Injunctions Land Cautions Setting Aside Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kiptoo Arap Chelule

Plaintiff

Jerop Taprandich Ngetich

Defendant

Selly Jepkirong Ngetich

Defendant

Christopher Bett

Defendant

Samuel Kiplimo Bett

Defendant

Ruth Jepkoech Ngetich

Defendant

John Kipkemei Cheptarbei

Defendant

P.K. Sibuchi, District Lands Registrar

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Orders

  1. 1 Whether the court can set aside restraining orders granted on 9th December, 2009 after the main suit was dismissed as res judicata.
  2. 2 Whether the caution registered against the subject land titles can be removed through the present application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the suit had already been dismissed as res judicata and that the orders previously granted did not mention or relate to any caution registered against the subject land titles. Since the existence and removal of the caution were not addressed in the dismissed suit or in the orders of 9th December, 2009, the present application to set aside those orders could not be entertained. The applicants were advised to seek appropriate remedies through a proper application. The application was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application to set aside the orders of 9th December, 2009 is dismissed.
  • There will be no orders as to costs.