[2019] KEELC 1974 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 1974 (KLR)

The court found that all Defendants were deceased prior to the filing of the Originating Summons. Service by advertisement was therefore ineffective, as there were no living Defendants to serve. The suit was a nullity ab initio, and the ex parte judgment entered on 18/05/2012 was irregular. There was no suit capable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 1974 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Peter Thuu Karanja; Defendant: Kigathi Wamagata; Defendant: Nyota Wamagata; Defendant: Wariko Wamagata; Defendant: Magwa Wamagata
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 237 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed; ex parte judgment set aside; suit declared a non-starter.
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Service of Process, Substitution of Parties, Setting Aside Judgment
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Service of Process Substitution of Parties Setting Aside Judgment

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

Peter Thuu Karanja

Plaintiff

Kigathi Wamagata

Defendant

Nyota Wamagata

Defendant

Wariko Wamagata

Defendant

Magwa Wamagata

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the suit was properly instituted against the Defendants who were deceased at the time of filing.
  2. 2 Whether the ex parte judgment entered on 18/05/2012 should be set aside due to the Defendants being dead at the time of service.
  3. 3 Whether the suit can be salvaged by substitution of parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that all Defendants were deceased prior to the filing of the Originating Summons. Service by advertisement was therefore ineffective, as there were no living Defendants to serve. The suit was a nullity ab initio, and the ex parte judgment entered on 18/05/2012 was irregular. There was no suit capable of being salvaged by substitution of parties, as the proceedings were fundamentally defective from inception. The only proper course was to set aside the judgment and declare the suit a non-starter. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; ex parte judgment set aside; suit declared a non-starter.

Orders

  • The judgment entered on 18/05/2012 is set aside.
  • There is no suit capable of being salvaged by substitution of parties.