[2007] KEHC 2498 (KLR)
The court held that the appellants were solely responsible for compiling the record of appeal, including attaching the title deed. The omission of the title deed was not attributable to the tribunal or the Appeals Committee but to the appellants themselves. Since the appeal had already been dismissed after a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] KEHC 2498 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Wambui Thindigwa; Applicant: James Ngunyi; Applicant: Kamau Njuguna; Respondent: Antony Chege Kamau; Respondent: Francis Chege Kamau
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 3 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
- Outcome
- application for review dismissed
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Review of Judgment, Appeal Dismissal, Land Registration, Record of Appeal Requirements
- 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
Wambui Thindigwa
Applicant
James Ngunyi
Applicant
Kamau Njuguna
Applicant
Antony Chege Kamau
Respondent
Francis Chege Kamau
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should review its earlier order dismissing the appeal for lack of evidence of land ownership.
- 2 Whether the failure to annex the title deed to the record of appeal was attributable to the appellants or to the tribunal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the appellants were solely responsible for compiling the record of appeal, including attaching the title deed. The omission of the title deed was not attributable to the tribunal or the Appeals Committee but to the appellants themselves. Since the appeal had already been dismissed after a hearing, the appropriate remedy was to file an appeal against the dismissal, not to seek a review. The application for review was therefore misconceived and without merit.
Court Disposition
application for review dismissed
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 10th November 2003 is dismissed.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYERI
Civil Appeal 3 of 2002
WAMBUI THINDIGWA………...…………...….………1ST APPLICANT/OBJECTOR
JAMES NGUNYI……………….………………….…..2ND APPLICANT/OBJECTOR
KAMAU NJUGUNA…………….……….…………….3RD APPLICANT/OBJECTOR
Versus
ANTONY CHEGE KAMAU……………......…….1ST RESPONDENT/PETITIONER
FRANCIS CHEGE KAMAU……………......……2ND RESPONDENT/PETITIONER
(Being an appeal from the decision of the Provincial Appeals Committee at Nyeri)
RULING
An application is made by the Appellant by way of Notice of Motion dated 10th November 2003. The application is brought under Order XLIV Rule 1(1) (b) and 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The application seeks that this court do review the order made on 23rd October 2003. On that day this Court, having heard the appeal filed against the finding of the Provincial Appeals Committee at Nyeri, delivered the following judgment.
“In this appeal, what official documents do I have from the relevant Government Land Office to confirm to me that what I am being told that the Appellants are the registered owners of the suit parcel of land is true? I find none. I am therefore unable to also say that the Appellants are indeed the registered owners and go ahead to grant the orders prayed for.
Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed with costs to the Respondents.”
By the present application the Appellants state that the appeal was dismissed for reasons beyond their control since it was Nyahururu Lands Dispute Tribunal and the Appeals Committee which failed to annex the title to the proceedings. They further deponed that land parcel NYANDARUA/OLARAGWAI/730 is registered in their names. They therefore prayed that the Court would review the order dismissing their appeal since they had now annexed the copy to the title to the application.
The Court has considered that application and it finds that the application is not merited. The Appellant seeks a review of the judgment of this Court but it ought to be noted that it was the Appellants who compiled the record of appeal containing the Memorandum of Appeal and the proceedings before the Provincial Land Disputes Appeals Committee, Central Province. That being the case the Appellants cannot blame anyone else but themselves for having failed to attach the title to their record of appeal. The appeal having been dismissed after the hearing the only venue opened to Appellant is to appeal against that dismissal. The Court therefore finds that the Notice of Motion dated 10th November 2003 is misconceived and is accordingly hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 27th day of July 2007.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE