[2016] KEHC 5051 (KLR)
The court found that the parties, through their advocates, had reached a consent to resolve the boundary dispute by having the District Surveyor, Meru Central, visit the disputed parcels of land (NTIMA/IGOKI/1887 and NTIMA/IGOKI/6070) in the presence of both parties and their advocates to determine the correct...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 5051 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: M'Muketha M'Njau; Defendant: Ismael Ndegwa M'Mirungu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 135 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Site Visit and Boundary Determination
- Outcome
- Consent adopted as order of the court; application allowed as per consent.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Boundary Disputes, Land Encroachment, Trespass, Land Ownership
- 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
M'Muketha M'Njau
Plaintiff
Ismael Ndegwa M'Mirungu
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Site Visit and Boundary Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant has encroached onto the plaintiff's land parcel NTIMA/IGOKI/1887.
- 2 Whether a site visit by the District Surveyor is necessary to determine the boundary between the two parcels of land.
- 3 How the costs of the site visit should be apportioned between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the parties, through their advocates, had reached a consent to resolve the boundary dispute by having the District Surveyor, Meru Central, visit the disputed parcels of land (NTIMA/IGOKI/1887 and NTIMA/IGOKI/6070) in the presence of both parties and their advocates to determine the correct boundary. The consent further provided that a report of the site visit would be filed in court within 60 days and that the costs of the visit would be shared equally. The court adopted the consent as its order, thereby providing a mechanism for the resolution of the boundary dispute and ensuring both parties' participation and cost-sharing in the process. The court's decision was...
Court Disposition
Consent adopted as order of the court; application allowed as per consent.
Orders
- The consent between the parties is adopted as an order of the court.
- The District Surveyor, Meru Central, shall visit land parcels NTIMA/IGOKI/1887 and NTIMA/IGOKI/6070 in the presence of the parties and their advocates to determine the boundary.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
CIVIL SUIT NO 135 OF 2008
M'MUKETHA M'NJAU ….........................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ISMAEL NDEGWA M'MIRUNGU............................................DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
This application is dated 20th, November, 2015 and seeks orders:-
THATan order be issued and a date be set, for visit to the disputed suit land (locus in quo) by the 1. District Surveyor in the presence of the Plaintiff/Applicant and the Defendant/Respondent.
2. THATthe costs for this application be provided for:
The application is buttressed by the Supporting affidavit of M'MUKETHA M' NJAU and has the following grounds:-
1. THATthe applicant is the owner of L.R. No. NTIMA/IGOKI/ 1887 and the Defendant /Respondent who owns L.R NTIMA/IGOKI/6070 is his neighbour.
2. THATthe Defendant /Respondent has encroached into the applicants land and illegally constructed thereon.
3. THATthe Plaintiff/Applicant reported the trespass to the Land Registrar but the dispute was never resolved.
4. THATthe Defendant/Respondent continued encroachment deprives the Applicant the right to possess, use and enjoyment of L.R NO. NTIMA/IGOKI/1887.
5. The Applicant continues to suffer irreparably.
On 12th April, 2016, the parties proffered a Consent which they asked the Court to adopt as its order. The Consent is in the following terms:-
“By Consent of the parties and their respective Advocates, the District Surveyor Meru Central in the presence of the parties and their Advocates to visit Land Parcel numbers NTIMA/IGOKI/1887 and NTIMA/IGOKI/6070 and determine the position of the boundary between the two parcels of land. A report on the site visit be filed in court within 60 days. Parties to share costs of the scene visit. We consent”.
The Consent is duly signed by the Advocates representing the parties. The following orders are issued:-
The Consent is adopted as an order of this Court.
As indicated in the Consent, parties will share costs of the visit to the locus in quo by the District Surveyor, Meru Central District.
As already undertaken, the Plaintiff will move the Surveyor appropriately, in liaison with the defendant's Advocate.
It is so ordered.
Delivered in open Court at Meru this 12th day of April, 2016in the presence of:-
CC: Daniel/Lilian
Manases Kariuki for the Plaintiff
Munene for the defendant
P.M NJOROGE
JUDGE