[2021] KEELC 4554 (KLR)
The court found that the omission of the resultant numbers of the sub-divided parcels in the previous order was an error that prevented the Land Registrar from implementing the court's decision. Since the application sought to correct this omission and facilitate the execution of the court's order, and there was no...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 4554 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Land Adjudication Officer Meru South/Maara District; Interested Party: M’Riba Rumukia; Interested Party: Mwenda Kajogi; Applicant: Zachary Njeru Mugambi; Applicant: M’Ndereba Magiri; Applicant: Francis Kaburu Johnson
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Judicial Review Case 21 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Ruling on Application for Review of Court Order
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Land Adjudication, Implementation of Court Orders, Review of Orders
- 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
Land Adjudication Officer Meru South/Maara District
Respondent
M’Riba Rumukia
Interested Party
Mwenda Kajogi
Interested Party
Zachary Njeru Mugambi
Applicant
M’Ndereba Magiri
Applicant
Francis Kaburu Johnson
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Application for Review of Court Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should review or vary its previous order to include the resultant numbers of the sub-divided land parcels for effective implementation.
- 2 Whether the omission of the sub-divided parcel numbers in the previous order was an error that hinders execution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the omission of the resultant numbers of the sub-divided parcels in the previous order was an error that prevented the Land Registrar from implementing the court's decision. Since the application sought to correct this omission and facilitate the execution of the court's order, and there was no opposition, the court allowed the application to review and vary the order by including the specific parcel numbers. The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act to ensure justice and effective implementation of its orders.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Prayer 2 of the application is allowed; the order dated 14.10.2020 is reviewed to include the resultant numbers of the sub-division of L.R. No. Muthambi/L-Kandugu/87, namely 1408, 1409, 1410, 1411, 1944, 1945 and 1946.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NO. 21 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NO. 615 OF 2013
REPUBLIC.....................................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
LAND ADJUDICATION OFFICER MERU
SOUTH/MAARA DISTRICT.....................................................RESPONDENT
M’RIBA RUMUKIA...............................................1ST INTERESTED PARTY
MWENDA KAJOGI..............................................2ND INTERESTED PARTY
EX-PARTE:
ZACHARY NJERU MUGAMBI...........................................1ST APPLICANT
M’NDEREBA MAGIRI.........................................................2ND APPLICANT
FRANCIS KABURU JOHNSON.........................................3RD APPLICANT
RULING
1. This application has been brought to court under sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act. It is dated 27th January, 2021 and seeks orders that:
A. The application be heard on priority basis.
B. The honourable court be pleased to review/vary the order dated 14. 10. 2020 by including the resultants numbers of the sub-division of L.R. No. Muthambi/L-Kandugu/87 which are 1408, 1409, 1410, 1411, 1944, 1945 and 1946.
2. It is supported by the affidavit of Francis Kaburu sworn on 27th January, 2021 and has the following grounds:
1. The Land Registrar is unable to implement the court order because the order does not mention the numbers of the sub-divided parcels to be cancelled and only names number 87 which appears in the registered one of the parcels (sic).
2. The error in omitting the said parcels is regrettable.
3. The court notes that the application is meant to facilitate the implementation of an order of this court. The 3rd applicant, Francis Kaburu, asked the court to allow the application.
4. In the circumstances, I allow prayer 2 in the application and award no costs.
Delivered in open Court at Chuka this 1st day of February, 2021 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Zachary Njeru – applicant
M’Ndereba Magiri – applicant
Francis Kaburu – applicant
HON. JUSTICE (DR) P. M. NJOROGE,
ELC JUDGE.