[2025] KEELC 5243 (KLR)
The court found that the previous order directing the Land Registrar to resurvey the suit parcels was too general and lacked specificity regarding the issues to be addressed. As a result, the report submitted did not resolve the parties' concerns. Since both parties agreed that the report was unsatisfactory and that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELC 5243 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Kitao Rupante Parkinaro; Defendant: Letesh Par Kinyaro; Defendant: Joseph Kiramat Letesh; Defendant: Isaiah Letesh; Defendant: Richard Letesh; Defendant: Stanley Letesh
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E018 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Compel Resurvey and Report by Land Registrar
- Outcome
- Application allowed with directions.
- Judges
- MD Mwangi
- Legal Topics
- Land Resurvey, Court Orders, Land Registrar Reports
- 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
Kitao Rupante Parkinaro
Plaintiff
Letesh Par Kinyaro
Defendant
Joseph Kiramat Letesh
Defendant
Isaiah Letesh
Defendant
Richard Letesh
Defendant
Stanley Letesh
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Compel Resurvey and Report by Land Registrar
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Land Registrar's report complied with the court's previous order.
- 2 Whether the Land Registrar should be compelled to repeat the resurvey and submit a new report.
- 3 Whether the terms of reference for the Land Registrar should be specified before re-issuance of the order.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the previous order directing the Land Registrar to resurvey the suit parcels was too general and lacked specificity regarding the issues to be addressed. As a result, the report submitted did not resolve the parties' concerns. Since both parties agreed that the report was unsatisfactory and that a repeat exercise was necessary, the court held that it would be ineffective to simply re-issue the same general order. Instead, the court directed the parties to jointly frame the specific issues that the Land Registrar should address in the resurvey and to file these issues within 21 days, preferably by consent. This approach ensures that the Land Registrar's subsequent...
Court Disposition
Application allowed with directions.
Orders
- The parties are directed to jointly frame the issues that the Land Registrar should look into before the re-issuance of the order.
- The parties should file the said issues within 21 days, preferably by consent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
Parkinaro v KInyaro & 4 others (Environment & Land Case E018 of 2021) [2025] KEELC 5243 (KLR) (13 June 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 5243 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
Environment & Land Case E018 of 2021
MD Mwangi, J
June 13, 2025
Between
Kitao Rupante Parkinaro
Plaintiff
and
Letesh Par Kinyaro
1st Defendant
Joseph Kiramat Letesh
2nd Defendant
Isaiah Letesh
3rd Defendant
Richard Letesh
4th Defendant
Stanley Letesh
5th Defendant
(In respect of the application by the parties for an order compelling the Land Registrar to resurvey the suit parcels)
Ruling
1. On 6th March 2023, Gicheru J issued an order directing the District Land Registrar Kajiado to resurvey the suit parcels, the subject matter of this suit and to submit a report within 60 days. This order was issued with the concurrence of the parties.
2. Pursuant to the said order, a report was indeed submitted by the Land Registrar, dated 8th April 2024. The parties however are dissatisfied with the said report. Both sides are in agreement that the report does not address the issues that it was supposed to; it therefore does not serve the intended purpose. They seek orders to compel the Land Registrar to repeat the exercise and submit another report.
3. A careful look at the order issued by my predecessor indicates that it merely directed the Land Registrar to resurvey the suit parcels with giving any particulars of the issues that the Land Registrar was expected to look into or address. Re-issuing the order without specifying the terms of engagement will more likely than not bring back the same unsatisfactory results.
4. Since both sides are in agreement, that the Land Registrar should repeat the exercise, the court directs them to jointly frame the issues that the Land Registrar should look into before the re-issuance of the order. The parties should do so in the next 21 days.
5. The parties may file the said issues that the Land Registrar should look into in the form of a consent.
It is so ordered.
DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KAJIADO VIRTUALLY THIS 13THDAY OF JUNE2025. M.D. MWANGIJUDGEIn the virtual presence of:Mr. Njoroge h/b for Mr. Ntele for the PlaintiffN/A by the DefendantsCourt Assistant: MpoyeM.D. MWANGIJUDGE