[2007] KEHC 998 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants were given an opportunity to be heard at the first Tribunal, where they cross-examined the appellant and gave statements. The absence of their participation at the appeal stage did not amount to a breach of natural justice, as the appellate body is required to proceed on the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] KEHC 998 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Eastern Provincial Land Disputes Appeal Committee; Respondent: Principal Magistrate’s Court Machakos; Respondent: Lydia Wairimu Gitu; Applicant: Kamene Ndawa; Applicant: Wathi Ndawa; Applicant: Wambua Ndawa
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Children Miscellaneous Application 141B of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Certiorari
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Certiorari, Land Disputes Tribunal, Natural Justice, Boundary 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
Republic
Applicant
Eastern Provincial Land Disputes Appeal Committee
Respondent
Principal Magistrate’s Court Machakos
Respondent
Lydia Wairimu Gitu
Respondent
Kamene Ndawa
Applicant
Wathi Ndawa
Applicant
Wambua Ndawa
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Certiorari
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Land Disputes Tribunal failed to accord the applicants a fair hearing, thus breaching the rules of natural justice.
- 2 Whether the Tribunal acted within its jurisdiction under the Land Disputes Act 18/90.
- 3 Whether the award and proceedings of the Tribunal and the judgment of the Resident Magistrate should be quashed by certiorari.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants were given an opportunity to be heard at the first Tribunal, where they cross-examined the appellant and gave statements. The absence of their participation at the appeal stage did not amount to a breach of natural justice, as the appellate body is required to proceed on the record of the first tribunal. The Tribunal acted within its jurisdiction as provided by the Land Disputes Act, and there was no evidence that the rules of natural justice were breached. Accordingly, the application for certiorari to quash the award and proceedings was dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT EMBU
Misc 141B of 2006
REPUBLIC…………………………………………....…………..................................…………..APPLICANT
VERSUS
EASTERN PROVINCIAL LAND DISPUTES APPEAL COMMITTEE……….……..1ST RESPONDENT
PRINCIPAL MAGISTRATE’S COURT MACHAKOS…...............................................2ND RESPONDENT
LYDIA WAIRIMU GITU……………………………….................................................….3RD RESPONDENT
(EXPARTE) – KAMENE NDAWA & 2 OTHERS
RULING
The Notice of Motion dated 18/10/2006 invokes Order 53 Civil Procedure Rules seeking Orders of Certiorari to quash the award and entire proceedings and the Judgment of the Resident Magistrate on the grounds that the Tribunal failed to hear the applicants before making the award thus violating the principles of nature justice. The record of Tribunals proceedings is exhibited Lydia Wairimu Gitu was the Appellant. She gave her evidence on oath. She was cross-examined by Respondent one Judas Mbili Ndawa. Thereafter Judas Mbili Ndawa was sworn and gave his evidence and was examined and by the panel. It comes out clearly that Judas was speaking for his family. He does not appear in the proceedings as a party. This application was filed by:
1. Kamene Ndawa
2. Wathi Ndawa
3. Wambua Ndawa
The record does not indicate who was Judas Mbili Ndawa in these proceedings although he was referred to as Respondent.
The applicants stated above were not recorded as present or that they spoke although they were in Tribunal 97/2005 on 15/4/2005. when they cross-examined Lydia Wairimu at length. Kamene Ndawa gave her statement parties had opportunity to call witnesses. On the whole I find that at the hearing in first Tribunal all parties were given opportunity to speak and did speak before the Tribunal.
I also find that it is at the appeal stage that the applicants are not recorded. It has to be noted that at an appeal level the appellate body should move on the record of the first tribunal.
Nevertheless this Appeal Tribunal in its ruling stated that after “hearing statements from both sides” made award that District Surveyor Machakos to survey disputed part of the boundary and excise 2. 6 hectares to appellant if that is shown to be correct by survey and any remainder shall go to Kamene the applicant. It is to be noted that there were documents to support the ownership of land namely search forms which shows the measurement of each land. It also appears that there are Title Deeds held. However even in disputes of boundary under registered land Act are dealt with by land registrars.
It is my finding that the award of the Tribunal was made within jurisdiction as given under Land Disputes Act 18/90. I also find that all parties were given adequate opportunity to be heard and that the Rules of natural justice were not breached.
I therefore dismiss the application with no order as to costs.
Dated this 15th May, 2007.
J. N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE
15/5/2007
Khaminwa – Judge
Njue – Clerk
Ms Ndorongo
Ruling read in court.
J. N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE