[2017] KEELC 597 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 597 (KLR)

The court found that the suit land was under adjudication as confirmed by the District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer, making the plaintiff's failure to obtain the requisite consent under Cap 284 a fatal defect. Furthermore, the existence of Tigania C.M.C.C No. 206 of 2015, involving the same parties and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 597 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Naomi Mwikathi; Defendant: Rosemary Ruguru; Defendant: Mercy Nguta Gatobu
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 207 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Interlocutory Application
Outcome
suit and application dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant
Legal Topics
Land Adjudication, Consent Requirement, Pendency of Suit, Abuse of Process, Injunctions, Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Land Adjudication Consent Requirement Pendency of Suit Abuse of Process Injunctions Jurisdiction

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Naomi Mwikathi

Plaintiff

Rosemary Ruguru

Defendant

Mercy Nguta Gatobu

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was required to obtain and file consent from the Land Adjudication Officer under Cap 284 and Cap 283 before instituting the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the existence of Tigania C.M.C.C No. 206 of 2015 involving the same parties and subject matter renders the present suit incompetent under section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the suit land was under adjudication as confirmed by the District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer, making the plaintiff's failure to obtain the requisite consent under Cap 284 a fatal defect. Furthermore, the existence of Tigania C.M.C.C No. 206 of 2015, involving the same parties and subject matter, rendered the present suit incompetent under section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act. The plaintiff was aware of the Tigania suit, and her filing of the present suit amounted to an abuse of court process. The court held that both the lack of consent and the pendency of the Tigania suit warranted dismissal of the present suit and the related application.

Court Disposition

suit and application dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant

Orders

  • The suit and the application dated 25:10:16 are dismissed with costs to the 1st Defendant.