Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedELC Case No. 15 of 2018· [2019] KEELC 3772 (KLR)

Dionecia Ciandeke v Ndururu Nyaga (Environment & Land Case 15 of 2018) [2019] KEELC 3772 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
2 April 2019
PNP.M. Njoroge
1,663 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan land claimant lost her injunction after presenting a forged court order to the Land Registrar, showing courts will punish document tampering harshly.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Chuka (P.M. Njoroge, J) on the plaintiff's notice of motion dated 13th December 2018 in a dispute over L.R. Karingani/Ndagani/294 and its subdivisions, including Karingani/Ndagani/1046. The plaintiff, claiming the land is family trust property registered in the defendant's name through fraud in 1994, sought temporary and permanent injunctions restraining the defendant from selling, transferring or disposing of the property pending hearing of the main suit, together with costs. On 2nd April 2019 counsel for the defendant alerted the court that the order extracted following the interlocutory ruling of 17th December 2018 had been altered. The court's actual order of 17th December 2018 had granted prayer 2 in terms of section 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act and issued an inhibition over the parcels; the order presented to the Land Registrar, Chuka instead purported to revoke the defendant's registration, substitute the plaintiff's name, and record that urgency was not certified. The judge found the extracted order to be a forgery and, on that basis, dismissed the application with costs in the cause. The court directed the registry to keep the file under lock and key, ordered both parties to comply with Order 11 within set timelines, and required the County Director of Criminal Investigations to investigate how the Land Registrar received the forged order and file a report within 30 days. The suit was fixed for hearing on 11th June 2019 by consent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Tampering with an extracted court order

Holding

The order taken to the Land Registrar for implementation did not reflect the order actually made in court on 17th December 2018 and was a forgery

Reasoning

The court compared the order it issued on 17th December 2018, which granted prayer 2 in terms of section 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act and an inhibition, with the order as extracted, which purported to revoke the defendant's registration and substitute the plaintiff's name and to record the matter as not certified urgent. Finding the extracted order at variance with the court record and therefore forged, the judge declined to entertain the application further and dismissed it, directing a criminal investigation.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A party who presents to a registry an altered or forged court order forfeits the court's indulgence on the interlocutory application

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Registry to ensure that the court file is kept under lock and key
  2. 2.The application dated 13th December 2018 dismissed with costs being in the cause
  3. 3.Plaintiff to fully comply with Order 11, CPR within 14 days; defendant to comply within 14 days after receipt of plaintiff's compliance documents, and notwithstanding within 14 days after expiry of the period granted to the plaintiff
  4. 4.County Director of Criminal Investigations to investigate the circumstances leading to the Land Registrar, Chuka receiving a forged court order and file a report within 30 days; defendant's advocate to serve this order upon the County Director of Criminal Investigations, Tharaka Nithi County, promptly
  5. 5.Suit to be heard on 11th June 2019 by consent of advocates

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Actsection 63(e)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 11
Jurisdiction invoked
Environment and Land Court jurisdiction (original civil suit; interlocutory application under section 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Dionecia Ciandeke v Ndururu Nyaga (Environment & Land Case 15 of 2018) [2019] KEELC 3772 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). ELC Case No. 15 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/3772/eng@2019-04-02

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