https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4158

Kirinyu v Gachagua & 2 others (Land Case E001 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 4158 (KLR) (17 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 4158 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Environment and Land Court at Nanyuki Land Case E001 of 2024 LN Mbugua, J June 17, 2026 Between Miriam Waithiegenyi Kirinyu Plaintiff and Godwin Gachagua 1st Defendant Land Registrar Laikipia 2nd Defendant Attorney General 3rd Defendant Ruling 1.The hearing of this matter is underway at defence stage. On 11.5.2026, the evidence of Dw1 was concluded, then counsel for the defendant sought adjournment to call two more witnesses namely; Mr. Bwononga advocate and the Land Registrar. He argued that the two witnesses are technical and their documents have already been filed in court whereby; Mr. Bwononga will explain the agreement dated 14.9.2004 at page 28 in the Trial bundle of the defence, while the Land Registrar will explain the Certificate of lease issued on 21.10.2011 and the attendant green card. Thus the two witnesses will not be introducing anything new. To this end, Counsel for the defendant is praying that Summons Requiring Attendance be issued by this court to the aforementioned persons. 2.In opposition thereof, counsel for the plaintiff averred that the two witnesses did not record statements. Thus allowing them to adduce evidence at this stage would be prejudicial to the plaintiff’s case which has been closed. He avers that the additional witnesses are meant to close gaps in defence case. Plaintiff’s Counsel seeks for dismissal of the application to call the two witnesses, hence this ruling. 3.I have considered the rival arguments. The fall back in determination of the question at hand is the Pre-trial exercise. In the case of Pinnacle Projects Limited v Presbyterian Church of East Africa Ngong Parish & another [2021] KEHC 8577 (KLR); [2021] eKLR, the court posed the question; What is the purpose and function of pre-trial discovery? And went ahead to give an answer as follows;“The question of its necessity and importance has been discharged in Halsbury’s Laws of England Volume 13 where it was stated as follows: “The function of the discovery of documents is to provide the parties with relevant documentary material before the trial so as to assist them in appraising the strength or weakness of their relevant cases, and thus to provide the basis for the fair disposal of the proceedings before or at the trial. Each party is thereby enabled to sit before the trial or to adduce in evidence at the trial relevant documentary material to support or rebut the case made by or against him, to eliminate surprise at or before the trial relating to the documentary evidence and to reduce the cost of litigation” 4.It is noted that on 12.5.2025, the court gave directions in the presence of counsels for the parties that a Pre-Trial Conference was to be undertaken on 7.7.2025. Come the date of 7.7.2025 and there was no appearance on the part of Counsel for the defendant. That however did not stop the said counsel from proceeding with the hearing of the case for the plaintiff on 6.10.2025. It is therefore quite apparent that the defence divested itself of the opportunity to indicate how many witnesses they desired to call at the pre-trial stage. I am therefore in agreement with the plaintiff’s assertions that calling the two witnesses at this stage will be prejudicial to the plaintiff’s case and it flies against the fair disposal of proceedings. 5.The objection is therefore upheld. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NANYUKI THIS 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2026 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS.LUCY N. MBUGUAJUDGEIn the presence of:Nancy Mwangi – C/AOketch for plaintiffMwangi Kariuki for defendants