[2016] KEHC 5857 (KLR)
The court found that since the plaintiff's suit was dismissed for want of prosecution and no appeal or challenge to the dismissal has been filed, the interlocutory orders of prohibition and injunction over Land Parcel No. NYAKI/MULATHANKARI/829 are spent. There is no legal basis for their continued existence. It is...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 5857 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Municipal Council of Meru; Defendant: M'Ikiao M'Iring'o; Defendant: Nathaniel Kithinji; Defendant: The Meru Central Land Registrar; Defendant: The Attorney General
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 93 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/lift Injunction and Prohibition Orders After Suit Dismissal
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Orders of prohibition and injunction discharged. Costs to defendants.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Injunction Discharge, Land Register Orders, Costs Award
- 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
Municipal Council of Meru
Plaintiff
M'Ikiao M'Iring'o
Defendant
Nathaniel Kithinji
Defendant
The Meru Central Land Registrar
Defendant
The Attorney General
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/lift Injunction and Prohibition Orders After Suit Dismissal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the orders of prohibition and injunction over Land Parcel No. NYAKI/MULATHANKARI/829 should be set aside following dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff has taken any steps to challenge the dismissal order.
- 3 Whether it is just to discharge the orders given the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that since the plaintiff's suit was dismissed for want of prosecution and no appeal or challenge to the dismissal has been filed, the interlocutory orders of prohibition and injunction over Land Parcel No. NYAKI/MULATHANKARI/829 are spent. There is no legal basis for their continued existence. It is in the interest of justice and to avoid prejudice to the defendants that the orders be set aside and discharged. The Land Registrar is directed to implement this order forthwith. Costs are awarded to the defendants.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Orders of prohibition and injunction discharged. Costs to defendants.
Orders
- Any orders of inhibition, prohibition or injunction prohibiting dealings in or alterations of the Register in respect of Land Parcel No. NYAKI/MULATHANKARI/829 issued on 18/05/2012 are discharged and the Land Registrar is ordered to implement this order forthwith.
- Costs are awarded to the defendants.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
CIVIL SUIT NO. 93 OF 2012
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF MERU..........................................PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
VERSUS
M'IKIAO M'IRINGO..................................................1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
NATHANIEL KITHINJI ..........................................2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
THE MERU CENTRAL LAND REGISTRAR.....3 RD DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL…………………….4TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
This application is dated 1st March, 2016 and seeks orders:-
(1) THAT this application be certified very urgent and be heard ex-parte.
(2) THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to set aside/lift and discharge orders of prohibition and injunction prohibiting any dealing or altering of the register in respect of Land Parcel No. NYAKI/MULATHANKARI/829 issued by this Honourable Court on 18/5/2012.
(3) THAT costs incidental to this application be borne by the Plaintiff.
The application is supported by the affidavit of NATHANIEL KITHINJI, the 2nd Defendant and has the following grounds:-
i. THAT the Plaintiff's suit was dismissed for want of prosecution on 22nd October, 2015.
ii. THAT the Plaintiff has not lodged any appeal or challenged the order for dismissal.
iii. THAT it will be in the best interest of justice that the orders be set aside and discharged as they have been spent on dismissal of this suit.
iv.THATunless the orders sought are granted the applicant will suffer prejudice.
This suit was dismissed on 22/10/2015. This application seeks to implement the import of this Court's Ruling. The application is allowed in terms of prayer 2. It is ordered as follows:-
1. Any Orders of Inhibition, prohibition or Injunction prohibiting any dealings in or alterations of the Register in respect of Land Parcel No. NYAKI/MULATHANKARI/829 issued by this Court on 18/05/2012 are discharged and the Land Registrar, in charge of the Register for parcel No. NYAKI/MULATHANKARI/ 829 is ordered to implement this order forthwith.
2. Costs are awarded to the Defendants.
3. It is so ordered.
Delivered in Open Court at Meru this 8th day of March, 2016 in the presence of:-
CC: Daniel/Lilian
Kitheka h/b Gichunge for Applicants
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE