[2019] KEELC 3673 (KLR)
The court held that the lower court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit since the value of each of the 12 parcels, even if the total is Kshs. 20 million, is less than Kshs. 2 million per parcel. The absence of a valuation report further undermines the claim that the matter exceeds the lower court's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 3673 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Mugera Kamotho; Defendant: James Muchiri Ndegwa; Defendant: David Muthengi; Defendant: John Nyaga; Defendant: M’Imwitha M’Rinthira; Defendant: Jackson Makunyi Kururu; Defendant: M’Gweta Murua; Defendant: Njeru Ngoroi; Defendant: Alexander Munene Mati; Defendant: Patrick Mutugi Mati; Defendant: John Gitonga Mati; Defendant: Catherine Kagendo Muturia; Defendant: M’Nandi Maikithe
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 05 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Land Case / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Directions for Hearing
- Outcome
- The court will hear and determine the suit expeditiously; suit set for hearing.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Rectification of Register, Jurisdiction of Court, Valuation of Land, Expeditious Trial
- 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
Mugera Kamotho
Plaintiff
James Muchiri Ndegwa
Defendant
David Muthengi
Defendant
John Nyaga
Defendant
M’Imwitha M’Rinthira
Defendant
Jackson Makunyi Kururu
Defendant
M’Gweta Murua
Defendant
Njeru Ngoroi
Defendant
Alexander Munene Mati
Defendant
Patrick Mutugi Mati
Defendant
John Gitonga Mati
Defendant
Catherine Kagendo Muturia
Defendant
M’Nandi Maikithe
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Directions for Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction to hear the suit based on the value of the subject matter.
- 2 Whether the lower court was correct in referring the matter for want of jurisdiction.
- 3 Whether the suit should be heard expeditiously given its age.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the lower court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit since the value of each of the 12 parcels, even if the total is Kshs. 20 million, is less than Kshs. 2 million per parcel. The absence of a valuation report further undermines the claim that the matter exceeds the lower court's jurisdiction. However, given the age of the suit and the court's original jurisdiction over environment and land matters, the Environment and Land Court will proceed to hear and determine the case expeditiously.
Court Disposition
The court will hear and determine the suit expeditiously; suit set for hearing.
Orders
- This suit be heard on 7th May, 2019.
- Costs will be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO. 05 OF 2019
FORMERLY CHUKA C.M’S CIVIL CASE NO. 114 OF 2018
MUGERA KAMOTHO........................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JAMES MUCHIRI NDEGWA...................1ST DEFENDANT
DAVID MUTHENGI..................................2ND DEFENDANT
JOHN NYAGA.............................................3RD DEFENDANT
M’IMWITHA M’RINTHIRA ...................4TH DEFENDANT
JACKSON MAKUNYI KURURU.............5TH DEFENDANT
M’GWETA MURUA....................................6TH DEFENDANT
NJERU NGOROI.........................................7TH DEFENDANT
ALEXANDER MUNENE MATI.................8TH DEFENDANT
PATRICK MUTUGI MATI..........................9TH DEFENDANT
JOHN GITONGA MATI............................10TH DEFENDANT
CATHERINE KAGENDO MUTURIA......11TH DEFENDANT
M’NANDI MAIKITHE...............................12TH DEFENDANT
RULING
1. This matter was referred to this court by the CM’s Court on the ground that the subject matter has a value of over Kshs.20 million.
2. The claim in the plaint is for rectification of the register to cancel the names of the defendants and replace them with the name of the plaintiff. There is no valuation to show the value of the 12 apposite plots. Even assuming that the total value amounts to 20,000,000/= shillings, if this is divided by 12 the value of each of the parcels of land is less than 2,000,000/= shillings.
3. The claim in the plaint is for rectification of the 12 registers. I do not agree that the lower court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine this suit.
4. Nevertheless, it is noted that this suit was filed on 4th March, 2015, over 4 years ago. It is necessary for this suit to be heard expeditiously. As this court has original jurisdiction to hear all environment and land cases, I agree to hear and determine this case expeditiously.
5. It is ordered that this suit be heard on 7th May, 2019.
6. Costs will be in the cause.
Delivered in open Court at Chuka this 29th day of April, 2019 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Miss Nzekele h/b I.C. Mugo for the defendants
Mugera Kamotho – Plaintiff
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE