[2016] KEELC 776 (KLR)

[2016] KEELC 776 (KLR)

The court found that the Interested Party was properly served with the pleadings and hearing notices, as evidenced by multiple affidavits of service. The Interested Party failed to provide credible evidence to rebut the presumption of service and did not call the process server for cross-examination. Furthermore,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEELC 776 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Peter Gachiri Murigi; Respondent: Said Athamn Mzee; Respondent: District Land Registrar - Lamu; Respondent: Hon. Attorney General; Interested Party: Stephen Thuku Kabebe
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application Application12 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/vary Injunction and Related Orders
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Injunctions, Land Control Board Consent, Cautions on Land, Setting Aside Orders
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Service of Process Injunctions Land Control Board Consent Cautions on Land Setting Aside Orders

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Gachiri Murigi

Applicant

Said Athamn Mzee

Respondent

District Land Registrar - Lamu

Respondent

Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Stephen Thuku Kabebe

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/vary Injunction and Related Orders

  1. 1 Whether the Interested Party was properly served with the pleadings and hearing notices before the orders of 26th October, 2015 were issued.
  2. 2 Whether the Interested Party is entitled to have the orders of 26th October, 2015 varied, discharged, set aside or lifted.
  3. 3 Whether the agreement for sale of the suit property was valid in the absence of Land Control Board consent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Interested Party was properly served with the pleadings and hearing notices, as evidenced by multiple affidavits of service. The Interested Party failed to provide credible evidence to rebut the presumption of service and did not call the process server for cross-examination. Furthermore, the Interested Party did not address the substantive legal issues raised by the Plaintiff, particularly regarding the validity of the sale agreement in the absence of Land Control Board consent. The court concluded that the Interested Party had no viable defence to the issues raised and that there was no basis to set aside or vary the orders issued on 26th October, 2015....

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application dated 5th November, 2015 is dismissed with costs to the respondents.