[2018] KEHC 8381 (KLR)
The court found that the application to amend the plaint was merited and unopposed. Given that the plaintiff and the interested party were now aligned in their interests and approach to the case, and that the interested party appeared to be the most aggrieved and likely to present the most critical evidence, it was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 8381 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Presbyterian Foundation; Defendant: Charles Ndungu Waithaka; Interested Party: Margaret Wanjiku Wariuki; Interested Party: Grace Wahito Ngari; Interested Party: Obadiah Kairi Maina
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 67 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Amend Plaint and Enjoin Interested Party as Co Plaintiff
- Outcome
- Application for amendment of plaint allowed with directions.
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Pleadings, Joinder of Parties, Trusts in Land, Ownership Disputes
- 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
Presbyterian Foundation
Plaintiff
Charles Ndungu Waithaka
Defendant
Margaret Wanjiku Wariuki
Interested Party
Grace Wahito Ngari
Interested Party
Obadiah Kairi Maina
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Amend Plaint and Enjoin Interested Party as Co Plaintiff
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to amend the plaint to reflect its position as trustee for the interested party.
- 2 Whether the interested party should be enjoined as co-plaintiff instead of remaining as interested party.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application to amend the plaint was merited and unopposed. Given that the plaintiff and the interested party were now aligned in their interests and approach to the case, and that the interested party appeared to be the most aggrieved and likely to present the most critical evidence, it was appropriate to enjoin Dr. Arthur Parish as co-plaintiff rather than retain its status as interested party. The court exercised its discretion to allow the amendment of the plaint, with the direction that the interested party be redesignated as co-plaintiff, and ordered that the amended plaint be filed and served within 14 days.
Court Disposition
Application for amendment of plaint allowed with directions.
Orders
- Dr. Arthur Parish to be enjoined as co-plaintiff and designation as interested party to change accordingly.
- Plaintiff granted leave to amend the plaint to reflect the new position and proper cause of action.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
CIVIL SUIT NO.67 OF 2008
PRESBYTERIAN FOUNDATION..................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
CHARLES NDUNGU....................................................DEFENDANT
AND
MARGARET WANJIKU WARIUKI
GRACE WAHITO NGARI
OBADIAH KAIRI MAINA
(suing as officials being Session Clerk, Session
Treasurer andFinance Chairman respectively of
P.C.E.A DR. ARTHUR PARISH.....................INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
(Application for amendment of plaint; application allowed save that interested party be enjoined as co-plaintiff given the changed circumstances of the case)
1. The application before me is that dated 6 September 2017 filed by the plaintiff. It seeks leave to amend the plaint.
2. The original suit was filed on 28 April 2008 by The Presbyterian Foundation against Charles Ndungu Waithaka. It was the contention of the plaintiff that it is the owner of the land LR No. 14242/2 which is land measuring 18. 82 Ha, having purchased it in a public auction, and that the defendant had unlawfully taken possession of 7 acres of the said land. In the case, the plaintiff sought to be declared the owner of the whole land and for eviction of the defendant. The defendant filed defence vide which he contended that the purchase of the land was done jointly between himself and the plaintiff and that he was entitled to 7 acres of the land which comprised of his contribution. In the course of the case, the parties entered into a consent on 20 April 2011, vide which they agreed that the defendant is entitled to 5 acres of the suit land. Aggrieved by the consent, the Dr. Arthur PCEA Parish, through the law firm of M/s Njuguna Matiri & Company Advocates (now Matiri, Mburu & Chepkemboi Advocates) , applied to be enjoined into these proceedings as interested party and to set aside the consent entered between the plaintiff and defendant. The Parish explained that the money used to purchase the land came from it, and that the plaintiff, an entity of the same church, was holding the land in trust for it. It did not recognize the alleged contribution of the defendant and contended that the consent was a breach of trust. The application to have the Parish come in as interested party and to set aside the consent was allowed. Later, the law firm of M/s Matiri, Mburu & Chepkemboi Advocates, took over the matter from the law firm of M/s Waruhiu, K'Owade & Nganga hitherto acting for the plaintiff, and are now acting for both plaintiff and interested party.
3. Through this application, the plaintiff has applied to amend the plaint so as to plead inter alia that they became registered as owners as trustees of the interested party. The other aspects of the claim are more or less what is contained in the original plaint.
4. I have considered the application which is not opposed. I also have no problem with it. However, I believe that given that the plaintiff and the interested party are now talking the same language, and appear to be in agreement on the manner in which the case should be prosecuted, it is more appropriate for the Dr. Arthur Parish to be enjoined as co-plaintiff rather than remain in this suit as interested party. They indeed appear to be the most aggrieved in the matter and seem to be the party that will present the most critical witnesses in the case.
5. I therefore direct that in the amended plaint, Dr. Arthur Parish be enjoined in the suit as co-plaintiff and their designation as interested party to change. The body of the plaint ought to be amended so as to reflect this position. Save for the above directions, the plaintiff may amend the plaint to put forth what it considers to be the proper cause of action. The Amended plaint be filed and served in 14 days.
6. I make no orders as to costs.
7. It is so ordered.
Dated, signed and delivered in open court at Nakuru this 7th day of February 2018.
JUSTICE MUNYAO SILA
ENVIRONMENT & LAND COURT AT NAKURU
In presence of : -
Mr. Bosire holding brief for Mr. Matiri for the plaintiff/applicant.
No appearance on the part of M/s Waiganjo & Co. Advocates for the defendant.
Court Assistant : Janepher Nelima
JUSTICE MUNYAO SILA
ENVIRONMENT & LAND COURT AT NAKURU