[2017] KEELC 2128 (KLR)
The court found that the consent signed by both parties and their advocates was properly executed and binding. The consent provided for the refund of the purchase price by the defendant to the plaintiff, rescission of the sale agreement, and lifting of inhibitions on the suit land. The court adopted the consent as...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 2128 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Vincent Mugambi Kaiga; Defendant: Esther Njoki Kimathi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 27 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Judgment on Consent
- Outcome
- suit settled by consent; judgment entered in terms of consent
- Legal Topics
- Rescission of Sale Agreement, Refund of Purchase Price, Lifting of Inhibitions
- 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
Vincent Mugambi Kaiga
Plaintiff
Esther Njoki Kimathi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment on Consent
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sale agreement between the parties should be rescinded.
- 2 Whether the defendant should refund the purchase price to the plaintiff.
- 3 Whether inhibitions registered against the suit land should be lifted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the consent signed by both parties and their advocates was properly executed and binding. The consent provided for the refund of the purchase price by the defendant to the plaintiff, rescission of the sale agreement, and lifting of inhibitions on the suit land. The court adopted the consent as its judgment, marking the suit as settled and ordering each party to bear their own costs.
Court Disposition
suit settled by consent; judgment entered in terms of consent
Orders
- The defendant shall refund to the plaintiff Kshs. 400,000 on or before 31st August, 2016.
- The agreement for the sale of land dated 20th January, 2014 between the parties is rescinded.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
E&L NO. 27 OF 2016
VINCENT MUGAMBI KAIGA.....................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ESTHER NJOKI KIMATHI.....................................................DEFENDANT
CONSENT/JUDGMENT
1. On 18. 07. 2016 the advocates representing the parties and the parties in this matter proffered the following Consent, which they asked the Court to adopt as it's Judgment.
CONSENT
1. The Defendant shall refund to the plaintiff a sum of Kshs. 400,000/= on or before 31st August, 2016 being the purchase price already paid to her and the agreement for the sale of land dated 20th January, 2014 between the parties shall be rescinded henceforth.
2. All inhibitions registered against land parcel number ABOGETA/L-CHURE/1676 AND 1677 be lifted forthwith.
3. Parties to bear own costs.
2. I find that the Consent is properly signed and is binding upon the parties.
3. The Judgment is hereby entered in terms of the consent dated 18. 07. 16. The suit is marked as settled.
4. Parties shall bear their own costs.
5. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2017 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
C.A: Janet
Gatari for the Plaintiff
Mutuma for the Defendant
Plaintiff present
HON. L. N. MBUGUA
ELC JUDGE