Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck Out· [2018] KEELC 683 (KLR)

Daniel Mutua Kithangati & another v Munyao Sila [2018] KEELC 683 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
16 November 2018
772 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan land court struck out a suit because the claimants should have challenged the title within the earlier succession case, not through a fresh lawsuit.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Defendant brought an application dated 13th October, 2014 seeking to strike out the Plaintiffs' Plaint dated 23rd October, 2013 on grounds that it was scandalous, frivolous or vexatious, would prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the action, and was otherwise an abuse of the process of the court, with costs. The application was supported by the Defendant's affidavit evidence that the suit land formed part of parcel Kyangwithya/Mulundi/1191, registered in favour of his deceased father, that a Decree had issued in his favour in Kitui SRMCC No. 312 of 2011 against the Plaintiffs' father, and that the present suit was res judicata. The Plaintiffs opposed through Grounds of Opposition, contending that res judicata did not apply and that they had a valid claim. The court noted that the Plaintiffs alleged a fraudulent sub-division of the deceased Sila Maithya Ngao's land without succession proceedings and sought cancellation of the title to parcel number 2033. However, the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant in Kitui Succession Cause No. 34 of 2005 showed that parcel 1191 was registered in favour of Musangi Masika and the Defendant in equal shares by court order, and was subsequently subdivided, with the Defendant obtaining a Title Deed for parcel 2033 on 20th July, 2010. The court held that the Plaintiffs' claim should have been ventilated in the succession cause and in Kitui PMCC No. 312 of 2011, that the suit was sub judice the latter, frivolous and an abuse of process. The court allowed the application and struck out the Plaint with costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Res judicata / abuse of process

Holding

The suit was struck out because the Plaintiffs' claim ought to have been raised in Kitui Succession Cause No. 34 of 2005 and Kitui PMCC No. 312 of 2011; the suit was sub judice the later Kitui suit and was frivolous and an abuse of process.

Reasoning

The Defendant's title to parcel 2033 derived from the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant in Kitui Succession Cause No. 34 of 2005, under which parcel 1191 was registered in favour of Musangi Masika and the Defendant in equal shares and later subdivided. The Defendant had also sued the Plaintiffs' father over the same land in Kitui SRMCC No. 312 of 2011. The Plaintiffs' claim should have been litigated in those proceedings; bringing a separate suit was res judicata and abusive.

p. 2
02

Striking out a plaint

Holding

The court allowed the Defendant's application and struck out the Plaint dated 23rd October, 2013 with costs.

Reasoning

The application sought striking out on grounds that the suit was scandalous, frivolous or vexatious, would prejudice, embarrass or delay fair trial, or was otherwise an abuse of process. The court found the suit frivolous and an abuse of process, given the prior succession and civil proceedings from which the Defendant's title emanated, and therefore allowed the application.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a party's title emanates from orders made in court proceedings, a party aggrieved by those orders must challenge them in those proceedings rather than by a fresh suit

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Defendant's Application dated 13th October, 2014 is allowed
  2. 2.The Plaintiffs' Plaint dated 23rd October, 2013 is struck out
  3. 3.Costs of the application and the main suit to the Defendant
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over a dispute relating to title to land; court also exercised inherent power to strike out an abusive suit

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Daniel Mutua Kithangati & another v Munyao Sila [2018] KEELC 683 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/683/eng@2018-11-16

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.