[2016] KEELC 1170 (KLR)
The court held that the application to amend the defence and introduce a counter-claim was made before the hearing and would enable the court to resolve all issues between the parties in a single suit, thus avoiding multiplicity of proceedings. The proposed amendments were not statute barred, and there was no...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEELC 1170 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: William Lokapel; Defendant: Veronicah Lokapel
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 27 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Amend Defence and Introduce Counter Claim
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- EO Obaga
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Pleadings, Counter Claims, Cautions on Land, Subdivision of Land
- 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
William Lokapel
Plaintiff
Veronicah Lokapel
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Amend Defence and Introduce Counter Claim
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant should be granted leave to amend her defence to include a counter-claim before hearing of the suit.
- 2 Whether the proposed amendment would prejudice the plaintiff or cause undue delay.
- 3 Whether the amendment is necessary for the just determination of all issues in controversy.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the application to amend the defence and introduce a counter-claim was made before the hearing and would enable the court to resolve all issues between the parties in a single suit, thus avoiding multiplicity of proceedings. The proposed amendments were not statute barred, and there was no credible evidence that the amendment would cause confusion or delay. The court found that the respondent's objections were unfounded and that allowing the amendment would facilitate a just and convenient resolution of the dispute. Accordingly, the application was allowed, and directions were given for filing and serving the amended pleadings.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The defendant/applicant is granted leave to amend her defence and include a counter-claim.
- The amended defence and counter-claim to be filed and served within 14 days from the date of the ruling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KITALE
CASE NO. 27 of 2014
WILLIAM LOKAPEL:.............................................PLAITNIFF
VERSUS
VERONICAH LOKAPEL:..................................DEFENDANT
RULING
The defendant/applicant Veronica Lokapel is the wife of the Plaintiff/Respondent William Lokapel. The plaintiff had filed the suit herein against the applicant seeking an order for removal of a caution lodged on LR. NO. West Pokot/Chepkono/157 by the applicant.
The applicant filed a notice of motion dated 9. 10. 2015 in which she sought leave of the court to amend her defence to include a counter-claim. The applicant contends that the amendment has been made before the suit is heard and that it will assist the court to determine all the issues at once. That there will be no prejudice suffered by the respondent as he will have opportunity to amend his plaint.
The applicant's application is opposed by the respondent through a replying affidavit sworn on 19. 10. 2015 and filed in court on 21. 10. 2015 The respondent contends that the amendment is only meant to delay the finalization of this case and that the intended amendment will confuse the whole issue in controversy. The respondent further contends that the applicant is out to disinherit his children and that some property mentioned in the proposed amended defence does not belong to him. He further contends that as the sole registered owner of the suitland, he should be let to sub-divide it among his wives as he deems fit.
I have considered the applicant's application as well as the opposition to the same. This is an application which seeks to amend the defence and introduce a counter-claim. The application has been made before the case is heard. From the proposed amended defence and counter-claim, it is clear that the issue revolves around sub-division of the properties in issue to the respondent's wives. There is no denial that the applicant is the wife of the respondent. Amendments which will enable the court to solve issues without parties having to resort to filing a multiplicity of cases ought to be freely given especially when they are made at the earliest opportunity as in this case. The proposed amendments are not statute barred and it is clear that it will settle all the issues in question in a convenient manner. The respondent's argument that the amendments will cause confusion or delay is unfounded. I allow the applicant's application and direct that the amended defence and counter-claim be filed and served within 14 days from today. The amended plaint and defence to counterclaim be done thereafter in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules.
It is so ordered.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kitale on this 25th day of January,2016.
E. OBAGA
JUDGE
In the presence of Mr. Chebii for the respondent.
Court Assistant - Isabellah.
E. OBAGA
JUDGE.
25/1/2016.