[2018] KEELC 3763 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3763 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff's suit was res judicata because the issue of ownership of the suit land (East Alego/Mur-Ngiya/1694, formerly plot No.4) had already been determined in previous suits—Nairobi CMCC NO.8745 of 2004 and Kisumu HCC NO.49 of 2007—between the same parties or those claiming under them. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3763 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Nelson Zadok Otieno; Defendant: Lucas Onginjo Gogo
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 154 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Land Dispute / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Plaintiff's suit struck out as res judicata; preliminary objection upheld.
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Ownership Disputes, Land Allocation, Title Registration
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Res Judicata Ownership Disputes Land Allocation Title Registration

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nelson Zadok Otieno

Plaintiff

Lucas Onginjo Gogo

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Dispute / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the suit is barred by the doctrine of res judicata under Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act.
  2. 2 Whether the issue of ownership of East Alego/Mur-Ngiya/1694 (plot No.4) has already been determined by a competent court.
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff has established a valid claim to the suit land based on alleged allocation in 1973.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff's suit was res judicata because the issue of ownership of the suit land (East Alego/Mur-Ngiya/1694, formerly plot No.4) had already been determined in previous suits—Nairobi CMCC NO.8745 of 2004 and Kisumu HCC NO.49 of 2007—between the same parties or those claiming under them. The Plaintiff failed to disclose these prior proceedings and did not provide sufficient documentary evidence of original allotment or title. The court held that the Plaintiff's claim could and ought to have been raised in the earlier suits, and the subject matter and parties were substantially the same. Accordingly, the suit was struck out for being filed in contravention of...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's suit struck out as res judicata; preliminary objection upheld.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's suit commenced by plaint dated 23rd June 2015 is struck out with costs.
  • The Defendant's preliminary objection is upheld.