Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedHCCA No. 21 of 2001 (Meru)· [2018] KEELC 1618 (KLR)

Veronica Mukomunene v Samson Muriira M’Inoti [2018] KEELC 1618 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya at Meru
3 October 2018
LMLucy N. Mbugua
255 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Meru ordered a prohibition on land removed because the underlying case had ended years earlier and nothing was pending.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This short ruling by the Environment and Land Court at Meru (Lucy N. Mbugua, ELC Judge) determined an application dated 22.6.2015 in which the applicant sought orders compelling the Land Registrar Meru to lift the prohibition placed on parcel no. Nyaki/Kithoka/2587. The applicant, described as applicant/appellant, argued that the appeal (HCCA No. 21/2001, Meru) had been finalized and nothing remained pending in court to justify continued prohibition, and that she intended to subdivide the land and share it among her children. The court examined a search certificate showing a prohibitory order registered on 16.9.2011 pursuant to a court order of 15.9.2011 from the High Court of Meru. The court was unable to ascertain the circumstances in which the prohibition was placed because the court file contained no record of 15.9.2011, the record jumping from 17.3.2011 to 20.7.2015. The court nonetheless observed that the suit had been finalized on 17.5.2007 upon delivery of judgment, and that no replying affidavit had been filed opposing the application. On those facts the court allowed the application and ordered the prohibition lifted, with no orders as to costs. The matter was delivered in open court at Meru on 3rd October 2018, with Kimathi appearing for the applicant and Ashaba holding brief for Kaumbi for the respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Lifting of a prohibitory order registered against land after conclusion of the suit

Holding

The application was allowed since the suit was finalized on 17.5.2007 and no replying affidavit opposed the application

Reasoning

The court noted the search certificate showing a prohibitory order placed on 16.9.2011 pursuant to a court order of 15.9.2011 whose circumstances could not be ascertained from the court record, as the file jumped from 17.3.2011 to 20.7.2015. The suit had been finalized by judgment delivered on 17.5.2007, and no replying affidavit was filed in opposition. On those facts the court lifted the prohibition.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a suit has been finalized and nothing is pending in court, a prohibitory order on the subject land ought to be lifted

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 22.6.2015 is allowed
  2. 2.The Land Registrar Meru is ordered to lift the prohibition placed on parcel no. Nyaki/Kithoka/2587
  3. 3.No orders as to costs
On appeal from
null
null
Jurisdiction invoked
Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land parcels (application to the Land Registrar Meru to lift a prohibition on title)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Veronica Mukomunene v Samson Muriira M’Inoti [2018] KEELC 1618 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). HCCA No. 21 of 2001 (Meru). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/1618/eng@2018-10-03

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