[2024] KEELC 13531 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 13531 (KLR)

The court found that the 1st defendant, having failed to file written submissions as directed for the disposal of the preliminary objection, demonstrated a lack of interest and failed to prosecute the objection. The absence of any alternative method for disposal and the non-attendance of the objector and counsel...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 13531 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Raphael Kenga Mwaruwa & 11 others; Defendant: Dr Tsuma Jembe; Defendant: Land Registrar Kilifi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 43 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection struck out for want of prosecution
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Preliminary Objection, Adverse Possession, Jurisdiction, Capacity to Sue, Estoppel
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Preliminary Objection Adverse Possession Jurisdiction Capacity to Sue Estoppel

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raphael Kenga Mwaruwa & 11 others

Plaintiff

Dr Tsuma Jembe

Defendant

Land Registrar Kilifi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the 1st defendant has capacity to be sued in respect of the estate of the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the determination of land appeal 26 of 1976 estops the plaintiffs from instituting proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether adverse possession proceedings must be instituted by originating summons under Order 37 CPR and not by plaint.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 1st defendant, having failed to file written submissions as directed for the disposal of the preliminary objection, demonstrated a lack of interest and failed to prosecute the objection. The absence of any alternative method for disposal and the non-attendance of the objector and counsel further justified striking out the preliminary objection. The court exercised its discretion to strike out the notice of preliminary objection dated 15/1/2024 with costs to the plaintiffs and the 2nd defendant.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection struck out for want of prosecution

Orders

  • The notice of preliminary objection dated 15/1/2024 is struck out.
  • Costs awarded to the plaintiffs and the 2nd defendant.