[2019] KEELC 1058 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 1058 (KLR)

The court found that the petitioners failed to attend court and had not served the petition upon the respondents. In the absence of service and prosecution, the application dated 9th October, 2019 was dismissed and ex parte orders previously granted were vacated. The court directed the petitioners to serve the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 1058 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Nyaga Muchiri; Applicant: Purity Mwathoko; Respondent: Thomas Njiru Kanyunga; Respondent: Micheru Kanyunga; Respondent: District Land Adjudication & Settlement Officer Meru South; Respondent: Land Registrar, Meru South; Respondent: Chief Land Registrar; Respondent: The Honourable Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 4 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Interlocutory Ruling on Service and Directions
Outcome
Application dismissed; ex parte orders vacated; directions issued for service and submissions.
Legal Topics
Land Adjudication, Service of Process, Right to Property
Source Language
en
Land and Property Constitutional Law Land Adjudication Service of Process Right to Property

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

Nyaga Muchiri

Applicant

Purity Mwathoko

Applicant

Thomas Njiru Kanyunga

Respondent

Micheru Kanyunga

Respondent

District Land Adjudication & Settlement Officer Meru South

Respondent

Land Registrar, Meru South

Respondent

Chief Land Registrar

Respondent

The Honourable Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Interlocutory Ruling on Service and Directions

  1. 1 Whether the petitioners have properly served the petition upon the respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the application dated 9th October, 2019 should be dismissed for non-attendance and lack of service.
  3. 3 What directions should be issued for the further conduct of the petition.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the petitioners failed to attend court and had not served the petition upon the respondents. In the absence of service and prosecution, the application dated 9th October, 2019 was dismissed and ex parte orders previously granted were vacated. The court directed the petitioners to serve the petition and file submissions within 21 days, and the respondents to respond and file submissions thereafter. The matter was set for further directions, emphasizing the necessity of service and compliance with procedural requirements to ensure fair hearing.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; ex parte orders vacated; directions issued for service and submissions.

Orders

  • The application dated 9th October, 2019 is dismissed and ex parte orders granted on 16th October, 2019 are vacated.
  • The petitioners to serve the petition upon the respondents and to file and exchange written submissions within 21 days of today.