https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3806

**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT BUNGOMA** **ELC LAND CASE NO. E017 OF 2025 OS** **ISAAC MUNIALO SITATI ………...……...……...…… 1ST PLAINTIFF** **JOSEPH CHEBUKWABI SITATI ……….……………. 2ND PLAINTIFF** **NETTY NANJALA SITATI …………………………… 3RD PLAINTIFF** **SIMON KHASAVULI SITATI ………………………… 4TH PLAINTIFF** **VERSUS** **NJUYA MUKHWANA MASINDE ………..………. 1ST DEFENDANT** **ISAAC MUNYASIA MUKHWANA ……………… 2ND DEFENDANT** **RULING** Isaac Munialo Sitati, Joseph Chebukwabi Sitati, Netty Nanjala Sitati and Simon Khasavuli Sitati filed the Originating Summons dated 9/6/2025 claiming adverse possession of the land known as Ndivisi/Ndivisi/3450 and 3451 through the firm of H.P. Wamalwa and Co. Advocates. It is not clear how Benjamin Barasa Wafula joined these proceedings and filed the application dated 8/2/2026 indicated to be filed in Bungoma ELC EPCC No. E017 of 2025 (OS). Benjamin Barasa Wafula introduced 3 interested parties to the suit and gives a list of 20 parties who he refers to as “Subsequent Parties” and who include the Judiciary Service Commission of Kenya, Harry P. Wamalwa Advocate, Kenya Law Reform Commission, the President of the Law Society of Kenya, the National Government of Kenya and the County Government of Bungoma among other parties. Benjamin Barasa, the 1st Interested Party sought to have this court stay the orders and practice directions which he claimed were “fabricated on 4/2/2026 when the subsequent parties and the Defendants abused the court process by deceiving and interfering with the trial judge when they committed offences related to judicial proceedings by withdrawing the interested parties application dated 26/6/2025 to evade accusations about destroying land ownership documents of 1959, 1962 and 1963”. He sought to have the application reinstated and for the court to join the 27 subsequent parties who include Justice Cherono by issuing a warrant for his arrest. The application lists other prayers which are difficult to comprehend but one can decipher that he wishes to join parties to this case and is challenging the court proceedings of 11/12/2025 and 4/2/2026. Another prayer sought is for this court to declare that the 1st and 2nd Defendant’s procured title deeds for Ndivisi/Ndivisi/338 on 6/12/2011 and 12/3/2015 by false pretenses and that they had committed offences related to judicial proceedings. Prayer No. 12 is for this court to issue “a permanent order staying orders by judges and court officers by fabricating contradictory statements that it was wrong for the 1st Interested Party to sue the judiciary, state officers and non-governmental organizations for violating the Judicial Service Code of Conduct and Ethics and Articles 159 and 160 of the Constitution. The main prayer seems to be for joinder of other parties to the suit. The application was made on the grounds that the Defendants and the subsequent parties “interfered with and deceived the trial judge to commit offences related to judicial proceedings when they withdrew the 1st Interested Party’s application dated 26/6/2025”. The 1st Interested Party gave a list of 6 matters which he claimed were over Ndivisi/Ndivisi/338. It was urged that Justice Cherono occasioned miscarriage of justice and abuse of office on 1/12/2025 when he declined to hear the Interested Party’s two applications. It was also urged that Judge Bor occasioned miscarriage of justice and abuse of office when she allowed the Plaintiffs, Defendants and the subsequent parties to withdraw the Interested Party’s application dated 26/6/2025 through the backdoor. Benjamin Barasa Wafula swore the supporting affidavit and annexed various documents some of which are not legible. The Plaintiffs filed grounds of opposition dated 16/5/2026 in which they contended that the Interested Party had not demonstrated any identifiable, direct and proximate legal interest in the suit land. Further, that he had not shown that the subsequent parties had any enforceable legal interest over the suit land. They maintained that the joinder of the parties sought was not necessary for the court to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all the questions in the suit. They argued that the application sought the introduction of new causes of action outside the scope of the pleadings before the court. It was their contention that joinder would complicate and convolute the proceedings thereby occasioning delay and injustice to the existing parties besides leading to additional expenses. The defendants argued through their grounds of opposition dated 14/5/2026 that the Interested Party had failed to demonstrate that any of the 30 subsequent parties or he had a direct and substantial interest in Ndivisi/Ndivisi/3450 and 3451. They argued that the attempt by the Interested Party to introduce a new cause of action would fundamentally change the nature of the suit. Additionally, that he had failed to demonstrate that the subsequent parties were necessary for the adjudication of the matter. What falls for determination is whether this court should issue the orders sought in the application dated 8/2/2026. This suit was commenced through an Originating Summons dated 9/6/2025 brought by the Plaintiffs against the Defendants. The Interested Party filed the application dated 26/6/2025 which the court notes was signed by Isaac Munyasi Mukhwana, Njuya Mukhwana and Peter Sikala Masinde. The application sought various orders that are not easily discernible. On 3/12/2025, another document entitled petition under the Judicial Service (Code of Conduct and Ethics) 2020 and Article 159 of the Constitution was filed by the Interested Party. When this matter came up in court on 4/2/2026, Mr. Njuya Mukhwana, the 1st Defendant informed the court that Benjamin Barasa was no longer representing them in the suit anymore and that they had instructed an advocate, Mr. Mwaka Busu. Mr. Busu Advocate informed the court that they wished to withdraw the applications dated 26/6/2025 and 24/7/2025 so that they could proceed with the main suit. The court marked those applications as withdrawn when the plaintiff’s advocate informed the court that he had no objection to the withdrawal. It is apparent that the Interested Party seeks to alter the claim for adverse possession by introducing a petition within the suit for adverse possession. He did not demonstrate that the 20 parties that he refers to as subsequent parties were necessary for this court to effectually and completely adjudicate over the adverse possession claim. Since the Interested Party is not a party to the originating summons which is the claim before this court, he ought not to have filed the application seeking to join more parties to the suit. He has not shown what interest he has in the suit land. The Interested Party can file a separate claim if indeed he has an enforceable interest in the suit land against parties who are liable for wrongdoing. The court declines to grant the orders sought in the application dated 8/2/2026. Each party will bear its costs for the application. Delivered virtually at Bungoma this 3rd day of June 2026. **K. BOR** **JUDGE** **In the presence of: -** Mr. Kennedy Wamacho for the Plaintiffs Mr. Hammerton Maloba for the Defendants Mr. Benjamin Barasa- the Interested Party Court Assistants- Bett & Metrine