[2024] KEELC 13584 (KLR)
The court found that the Appellant failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds to set aside the ruling of the trial court delivered on 12/7/2023. The 1st Respondent's assertion that there was nothing to stay, as she had already been registered as the owner of the suit property, was not controverted by the Appellant....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 13584 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Lawrence Kinyua Mwai; Respondent: Florence Wairimu Muita; Respondent: District Land Registrar; Respondent: Nyariginu Farmers Limited; Respondent: Hon Attorney General; Respondent: Chief Land Registrar
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nanyuki
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications for Stay and Setting Aside
- Outcome
- Applications dismissed; Appellant directed to set down the appeal for hearing.
- Judges
- AK Bor
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Proceedings, Setting Aside Rulings, Ownership of Land, Appeal Timelines
- 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
Lawrence Kinyua Mwai
Appellant
Florence Wairimu Muita
Respondent
District Land Registrar
Respondent
Nyariginu Farmers Limited
Respondent
Hon Attorney General
Respondent
Chief Land Registrar
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications for Stay and Setting Aside
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the ruling of the trial court delivered on 12/7/2023 should be set aside.
- 2 Whether stay of proceedings in Nanyuki CM ELC Case No. E002 of 2021 should be granted pending hearing and determination of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Appellant failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds to set aside the ruling of the trial court delivered on 12/7/2023. The 1st Respondent's assertion that there was nothing to stay, as she had already been registered as the owner of the suit property, was not controverted by the Appellant. The court held that the interests of justice would be better served by the Appellant prosecuting his appeal rather than seeking interlocutory relief through applications. Consequently, the court declined to grant the orders sought in the applications dated 26/7/2023 and 9/10/2023, and directed the Appellant to set down the appeal for hearing.
Court Disposition
Applications dismissed; Appellant directed to set down the appeal for hearing.
Orders
- The applications dated 26/7/2023 and 9/10/2023 are dismissed.
- The Appellant is directed to set down the appeal for hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
Mwai v Muita & 4 others (Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 13584 (KLR) (13 November 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 13584 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nanyuki
Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2023
AK Bor, J
November 13, 2024
Between
Lawrence Kinyua Mwai
Appellant
and
Florence Wairimu Muita
1st Respondent
District Land Registrar
2nd Respondent
Nyariginu Farmers Limited
3rd Respondent
Hon Attorney General
4th Respondent
Chief Land Registrar
5th Respondent
Ruling
1. This ruling relates to two applications brought by the Appellant. In the first application dated 26/7/2023, the Appellant seeks to have the ruling of the Learned Magistrate dated 12/7/2023 set aside. He also challenges the 1st Respondent’s ownership of plot number 438.
2. Through the second application dated 9/10/2023, the Appellant seeks to have Nanyuki CM ELC Case No. E002 of 2021 stayed, pending hearing and determination of his appeal. The application was made on the grounds that the Learned Magistrate may proceed with the suit which may interfere with the Appellant’s right to have his appeal heard and determined.
3. The Appellant swore the supporting affidavit and made arguments on how the 3rd Respondent granted the 1st Respondent plot number 438.
4. The 1st Respondent opposed the application through the Replying Affidavit she swore on 8/12/2023 in which she urged that there was nothing to stay. Further, she contended that the Appellant filed this appeal out of time without leave of the court.
5. The Appellant filed submissions which in essence argue the appeal and not the applications.
6. The issue for determination is whether the court should set aside the ruling of the trial court delivered on 12/7/2023 and grant the Appellant stay of proceedings in Nanyuki CM ELC Case No. E002 of 2021 pending hearing and determination of this appeal.
7. What the court can discern from the record of appeal filed by the Appellant is that he is challenging the ruling of the trial court of 12/7/2023 and findings that the suit property belonged to the 1st Respondent. The 1st Respondent averment that there was no action to be stayed since she had already been registered as the owner of the suit land was not controverted by the Appellant. It would serve the interests of justice if the Appellant were to take steps to canvass his appeal instead of seeking to set aside the ruling through an application.
8. The court declines to grant the orders sought in the applications dated 26/7/2023 and 9/10/2024. The Appellant is directed to set down the appeal for hearing.
DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIVASHA THIS DAY 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024. K. BORJUDGEIn the presence of: -Mr. Lawrence Mwai - AppellantMr. Amos Chweya for the 1st RespondentNo appearance for the 2nd to 5th Respondents