[2020] KEELC 3805 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant, as the current owner of Kilifi/Roka/1243—a parcel directly affected by the Tribunal's award and the subject of the pending appeal—has a legitimate interest in the outcome of the proceedings. The award obtained by the respondent effectively makes him owner of the applicant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 3805 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Noel Mwatati Mwakilele; Respondent: Julius Mwangata; Applicant: James Moses Mugo
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 61 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Joinder as Interested Party
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Joinder of Parties, Land Ownership Disputes, Land Disputes Tribunal Awards
- 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
Noel Mwatati Mwakilele
Appellant
Julius Mwangata
Respondent
James Moses Mugo
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Joinder as Interested Party
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant, as a subsequent owner of a parcel affected by the Tribunal award, should be enjoined as an interested party in the appeal.
- 2 Whether the applicant's interests are directly affected by the outcome of the pending appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant, as the current owner of Kilifi/Roka/1243—a parcel directly affected by the Tribunal's award and the subject of the pending appeal—has a legitimate interest in the outcome of the proceedings. The award obtained by the respondent effectively makes him owner of the applicant's parcel, and the applicant was not a party to the original proceedings. Any judgment rendered in the appeal would therefore affect the applicant's proprietary rights. In accordance with the principles of natural justice and the Civil Procedure Rules, the applicant is entitled to be heard before any adverse orders are made against him. The application for joinder as an interested party...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The applicant, James Moses Mugo, is enjoined as an interested party to this appeal and is at liberty to make submissions on the appeal.
- There will be no orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT & LAND COURT
AT MOMBASA
ELCA NO. 61 OF 2013
NOEL MWATATI MWAKILELE.......................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
JULIUS MWANGATA.....................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
(Application to be enjoined as interested party in an appeal; appeal emanating from a decision of the Land Disputes Tribunal; applicant being an owner of one of the parcels of land mentioned in the award but not having been party to the Tribunal proceedings; application allowed)
1. The application before me is brought by one James Moses Mugo who has applied to be made an interested party in these proceedings.
2. To put matters into context, the dispute between the appellant and the respondent was commenced before the Bahari Land Disputes Tribunal created under the Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed in 2011 by the Environment and Land Court Act). The claimant before the Tribunal was Julius Mwangata the respondent in this appeal. At the Tribunal, he stated that he purchased 6 acres of the disputed land in the year 1978 from one Saidi Kandondo and he took possession. He claimed that in the year 2002, the appellant came to the land and started clearing it and he later intermittently came to the land. On the other hand, the appellant asserted that he purchased a portion of the land which was described as Tezo/Roka/273 from Saidi Kandondo in the year 1987 and they obtained the Land Control Board’s consent to subdivide the land into two portions of 6 acres each. The two portions bore the numbers 1202 and 1203 and the parcel No. 1203 was subsequently transferred to him. He later subdivided the same into the plots No. 1243 and 1244 and transferred the plot No. 1243 (measuring 5 acres) to the name of Hamilton Mwandawiro Samboja. In its award, the Tribunal held that the sale to the appellant was wrongful since the land had already been sold to the respondent in the year 1978. The Tribunal further directed the Land Registrar to issue the respondent with title to the 6 acres being the plot No.1203. Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal before the Provincial Appeals Committee. However, the Committee had not finalized the matter by the time the Land Disputes Tribunal Act was repealed and the appeal was therefore transferred to this Court and the same is pending hearing.
3. In this application, the applicant avers that he is the lawful owner of the land parcel Kilifi/Roka/1243 which he purchased from Hamilton Mwandawiro Samboja. He thus contends that his interests are at stake.
4. The application is not opposed and on my part I see no reason why I should not allow it. It is apparent that whatever award the respondent obtained affects the owner of this parcel of land Kilifi/Roka/1243 for the respondent obtained an award which essentially makes him the owner of this parcel of land as well. The owner at the time of the award was Mr. Samboja and he was never made a party before the Tribunal. It is now disclosed that he has transferred his interest to the applicant and any judgment that will be rendered in this matter will therefore affect the applicant. The applicant as owner of one of the parcels in dispute is also entitled to be heard before any adverse orders are made against him.
5. The application is therefore allowed and the applicant is hereby enjoined as interested party to this appeal and is at liberty to make submissions on the appeal.
6. There will be no orders as to costs.
7. Orders accordingly.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at MOMBASA this 29th day of January 2020.
_______________________
MUNYAO SILA,
JUDGE.
IN THE PRESENCE OF:
Ms. Arika for the applicant.
Ms Mulisho for the appellant.
No appearance on the part of M/s Katsoleh & Company Advocates for the respondent.
Court Assistant; David Koitamet.