[2022] KEELC 628 (KLR)
The court found that although Civil Appeal No 390 of 2019 is pending before the Court of Appeal, it arises from different proceedings (ELC 157 of 2016 as consolidated with ELC 381 of 2014) and there are no orders of stay of execution in place. The parties in the current suit have already been heard in the previous...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 628 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Registered Trustees of Teleposta Pension Scheme; Defendant: Bernard Kariuki Wataari; Defendant: Rebecca Letangule; Defendant: Remguis Okeyo; Defendant: Faith Njoroge; Defendant: Jacqueline Kezia; Defendant: Beatrice Kalenda; Defendant: Catherine Kirara; Defendant: Kennedy Bwosi; Defendant: Jennifer Okoth; Defendant: Lawrence Mugambi; Defendant: Paul M. Gitau; Defendant: Ken M. Sitima
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E134 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- preliminary objection dismissed with costs to the plaintiff
- Judges
- LC Komingoi
- Legal Topics
- Subjudice Principle, Vacant Possession, Eviction Orders, Multiplicity of Suits
- 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
Registered Trustees of Teleposta Pension Scheme
Plaintiff
Bernard Kariuki Wataari
Defendant
Rebecca Letangule
Defendant
Remguis Okeyo
Defendant
Faith Njoroge
Defendant
Jacqueline Kezia
Defendant
Beatrice Kalenda
Defendant
Catherine Kirara
Defendant
Kennedy Bwosi
Defendant
Jennifer Okoth
Defendant
Lawrence Mugambi
Defendant
Paul M. Gitau
Defendant
Ken M. Sitima
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit is sub judice in light of Civil Appeal No 390 of 2019 pending before the Court of Appeal.
- 2 Whether the plaint should be struck out and the suit dismissed as an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although Civil Appeal No 390 of 2019 is pending before the Court of Appeal, it arises from different proceedings (ELC 157 of 2016 as consolidated with ELC 381 of 2014) and there are no orders of stay of execution in place. The parties in the current suit have already been heard in the previous matters, and there are no other proceedings pending before this court in respect of the same parties and subject matter. Therefore, the doctrine of sub judice does not apply, and the preliminary objection lacks merit. The suit is not an abuse of court process and is not barred from proceeding.
Court Disposition
preliminary objection dismissed with costs to the plaintiff
Orders
- The preliminary objection is dismissed with costs to the Plaintiff/Respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
41 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT NAIROBI
ELC CASE NO. E134 OF 2021
REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF TELEPOSTA PENSION SCHEME...............PLAINTIFF
=VERSUS=
BERNARD KARIUKI WATAARI...............................................................1ST DEFENDANT
REBECCA LETANGULE............................................................................2ND DEFENDANT
REMGUIS OKEYO......................................................................................3RD DEFENDANT
FAITH NJOROGE........................................................................................4TH DEFENDANT
JACQUELINE KEZIA.................................................................................5TH DEFENDANT
BEATRICE KALENDA................................................................................6TH DEFENDANT
CATHERINE KIRARA................................................................................7TH DEFENDANT
KENNEDY BWOSI......................................................................................8TH DEFENDANT
JENNIFER OKOTH....................................................................................9TH DEFENDANT
LAWRENCE MUGAMBI..........................................................................10TH DEFENDANT
PAUL M. GITAU.........................................................................................11TH DEFENDANT
KEN M. SITIMA..........................................................................................12TH DEFENDANT
RULING
1. By a plaint dated 15th April 2021, the Plaintiff seeks judgment against the Defendants jointly and severally for orders that the Defendants be directed and/or ordered to give vacant possession and/or vacate the suit premises i.e Houses Numbers 3B, 5A, 7A, 9A, 1B, 2B, 5B, 6B, 7B, 9B and 4a within sixty (60) days from the date of the order and in default an order for eviction to issue.
2. In response the Defendants filed a notice of preliminary objection dated 9th June 2021 on the following grounds:-
1. That the issues canvassed in the plaint support of the said orders sought are res subjudice the same being directly and substantially in issue between inter alia, the same parties herein in Civil Appeal 390 of 2019 and in Civil Appeal Application in CA 390/2019 pending the Court of Appeal in Nairobi wherein the court is yet to determine the rights of defendants to own premises they occupy and also determine whether well to issue a temporary injunction prohibiting the plaintiff form evicting the defendants herein pending the appeal.
2. That entertaining this suit will result in multiplicity of suits between the same parties and over the same subject matter which is an abuse of the court process.
3. That the defendants shall pray that the honourable court to strike out the plaintiff’s plaint dated 15th April 2021 and dismiss this suit with costs to the defendants.”
3. On the 26th July 2021, the court with the consent of the parties directed that the preliminary objection be canvassed by way of written submissions.
4. It is the Defendants/Applicants submission that this suit is subjudice because Civil Appeal No 390 of 2019 is pending in the Court of Appeal.
5. The Plaintiff/Respondent submissions is that the Defendants/Applicants have never prosecuted Civil Appeal No 39 of 2019. Further that there are no orders of stay of execution issued.
6. I have considered the preliminary objection and the rival submissions. The issue is whether the preliminary objection is merited.
7. The main ground is that the Civil Appeal No 390 of 2019 is pending the Court of Appeal.
8. I note that Civil Appeal No 390 of 2019 arises out of ELC 157 of 2016 as consolidated with ELC 381 of 2014. The parties were already heard before judgment was delivered. There are no orders of stay of execution.
9. In essence, there are no other proceedings pending before this court in respect of the parties herein. This suit is therefore not subjudice.
10. I find no merit in the preliminary objection and the same is dismissed with costs to the Plaintiff/Respondent.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED NAIROBI THIS 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2022.
..........................
L. KOMINGOI
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Ms Ikongo for Ms Mathenge for the Plaintiff
Ms Muhia for the Defendants
Steve - Court Assistant