[2003] KEHC 484 (KLR)

[2003] KEHC 484 (KLR)

The court found that although the property in dispute is the same as in the previous suit (RMCC 2361 of 2002), the parties and issues are not identical. The previous suit involved different parties (Kibibi Shaibu vs Fatma Abdalla) and sought vacant possession, whereas the current suit concerns whether the defendant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] KEHC 484 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Omar Said Awah; Plaintiff: Fahima Said Awadh; Defendant: Mwaa Soodi Binti Sahibu Wambuana
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 78 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection dismissed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Preliminary Objection, Sub Judice, Pleadings Defects
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Res Judicata Preliminary Objection Sub Judice Pleadings Defects

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Omar Said Awah

Plaintiff

Fahima Said Awadh

Plaintiff

Mwaa Soodi Binti Sahibu Wambuana

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the suit is res judicata due to prior litigation involving the same property.
  2. 2 Whether the suit is sub judice due to a pending appeal on the same property.
  3. 3 Whether the plaint is defective for non-compliance with Order VII rule 1 (I) (e) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the property in dispute is the same as in the previous suit (RMCC 2361 of 2002), the parties and issues are not identical. The previous suit involved different parties (Kibibi Shaibu vs Fatma Abdalla) and sought vacant possession, whereas the current suit concerns whether the defendant is entitled to have the property registered in her personal name. Therefore, the doctrine of res judicata does not apply, and Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act is not triggered. The preliminary objection is thus dismissed, and the suit may proceed.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection dismissed

Orders

  • The preliminary objection is dismissed.