Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedApplication dated 19.11.2019 (in relation to Meru ELC No. 311 of 2013 (OS))· [2020] KEELC 3495 (KLR)

Andrew Mungatia Anjuri & 2 others v Kirima Gideon Ringera [2020] KEELC 3495 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
26 February 2020
LMLucy N. Mbugua
431 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Meru court lifted an old inhibition blocking land transfer, letting the owners who won an adverse possession case finally register their title.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an unopposed notice of motion dated 19th November 2019 in which the applicants sought the lifting of an inhibition order registered against parcel Nyaki/Giaki/865. The applicants explained that they had in 1989 filed Meru High Court Civil Case No. 247 of 1989 seeking transfer of a share of the suit land, in which inhibition orders were issued and registered, and the 1st applicant also lodged a caution. The court file in that suit was lost at the registry before conclusion, necessitating the filing of a fresh suit. On 25th April 2018, the court delivered judgment in Meru ELC No. 311 of 2013 (OS) in favour of the applicants, declaring them owners of the parcel by adverse possession. However, the inhibition orders from the 1989 suit remained in force, preventing the judgment from being effected, and the applicants therefore sought their lifting so the judgment could be implemented. The application was served but no response was filed, and the court found it unopposed and merited. The court allowed the application as drawn, lifted the inhibition, directed that the order be served on the district land registrar Meru Central District for compliance, and ordered that costs be in the cause. The ruling was delivered on 26th February 2020 by Lucy N. Mbugua, ELC Judge, at Meru.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether an unopposed application to lift an inhibition order should be allowed where the inhibition obstructs execution of a judgment in favour of the applicants

Holding

The application was merited and allowed as drawn; the inhibition registered against Nyaki/Giaki/865 was lifted so the judgment of 25th April 2018 could be effected.

Reasoning

The applicants obtained judgment in Meru ELC No. 311 of 2013 (OS) on 25th April 2018 declaring them owners of Nyaki/Giaki/865 by adverse possession. The inhibition order from the lost-file 1989 suit remained registered, blocking registration. The application was served but unopposed. The court found it fair and just to lift the inhibition to effectuate the judgment and allowed the application as drawn.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a judgment has been delivered in favour of parties but cannot be effected because of a subsisting inhibition order, it is fair and just to lift the inhibition to effectuate the judgment

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The inhibition order issued and registered against the parcel of land known as Title Number Nyaki/Giaki/865 is lifted
  2. 2.The order lifting the inhibition be served upon the district land registrar Meru Central District for compliance
  3. 3.Costs of the application be in the cause
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land matters relating to parcel Nyaki/Giaki/865 (provision not expressly stated in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Andrew Mungatia Anjuri & 2 others v Kirima Gideon Ringera [2020] KEELC 3495 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Application dated 19.11.2019 (in relation to Meru ELC No. 311 of 2013 (OS)). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/3495/eng@2020-02-26

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