Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the extract (suit instituted by plaint filed 6 June 2017)· [2021] KEELC 1831 (KLR)

George Stephen Macharia v Issa Njawiri Jabiri & 2 others [2021] KEELC 1831 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
28 September 2021
2,950 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court set aside a land judgment because the plaintiff sued the wrong names and never personally served the real owners.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The 2nd defendant applied to set aside an ex parte judgment entered against him and the 1st defendant in a suit in which the plaintiff claimed allocation of plot Kwale/Diani Settlement Scheme/397 and impugned the titles issued to the 1st and 2nd defendants as fraudulent. Summons had been served by newspaper advertisement after the court allowed substituted service, and interlocutory judgment was entered on 29 November 2018, with final judgment delivered on 31 July 2019, upon which the plaintiff registered himself as proprietor and allegedly began subdividing the land. The applicant contended service was defective: fresh summons were not extracted, the advertisement referred only to a notice of application rather than summons, the advocates named in the advertisement were not then on record, and crucially the names used in the pleadings and advertisement ('Issa Njawiri Jabiri' and 'Stanley Ndinguri Wanjiru') differed from the correct names on the Green Card ('Issa Mjawiri Jabiri' and 'Stanley Ndinguri Wanjiku'). He also asserted the 1st defendant was deceased and that he had a good defence including limitation. The court agreed that service was improper because the correct parties were never served, holding the judgment irregular and liable to be set aside ex debito justitiae; alternatively, applying Patel v East Africa Cargo Handling Services Ltd, the applicant had shown a triable defence. The court allowed the application, set aside the judgment, ordered amendment of the defendants' names, restrained the plaintiff from interfering with the applicant's possession, ordered cancellation of the plaintiff's registration and reversion of the register, and awarded costs to the applicant, finding calculated mischief by the plaintiff.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether service was proper despite misdescription of the defendants' names

Holding

Service was improper because the summonses and newspaper advertisement named 'Issa Njawiri Jabiri' and 'Stanley Ndinguri Wanjiru' rather than the correct names on the Green Card, 'Issa Mjawiri Jabiri' and 'Stanley Ndinguri Wanjiku', so the correct parties were never served.

Reasoning

The plaintiff himself produced the Green Card showing the correct registered proprietors' names, which differed from the names used in the pleadings and advertisement. Since service was substituted and not personal, the misdescription could not be excused as a mere misnomer; a person named Wanjiku seeing 'Wanjiru' would not think the advertisement referred to him. The judgment resulting from such service occasioned injustice and had to be set aside as of right.

p. 2
02

Whether the applicant demonstrated a good defence warranting setting aside

Holding

Even assuming the judgment was regular, the applicant demonstrated a good defence raising triable issues (his title, long possession, and a proposed limitation preliminary objection) and was entitled to be heard.

Reasoning

Applying Patel v East Africa Cargo Handling Services Ltd, the court's main concern is to do justice; a defence on merits need only raise a triable issue, not one bound to succeed. The applicant asserted he purchased the land from the 1st defendant, was registered in 2009, and had been in continuous possession with developments; he ought to be allowed to ventilate that defence.

p. 3
03

Whether the plaintiff's registration following the judgment should be cancelled

Holding

The plaintiff's registration as proprietor pursuant to the set-aside judgment had to be cancelled so the register reverts to its position before the suit.

Reasoning

Following the ex parte judgment, the plaintiff registered himself as proprietor and was moving to subdivide and sell the land. Since the judgment and all consequential orders were set aside, the consequential registration could not stand; the plaintiff must litigate on the title as it was when he filed suit, and only upon success could title be registered in his name.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Wrong naming/description of parties in summons and substituted service, where there is no personal service to cure it, is a solid ground for setting aside an ex parte judgment as of right.
  • A judgment entered pursuant to misdescription of parties that occasioned injustice is irregular and must be set aside ex debito justitiae.
  • Even where a judgment is regular, a defendant who demonstrates a defence raising a triable issue is entitled to have it set aside.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Ex parte judgment and all consequential orders set aside; applicant granted leave to defend the suit
  2. 2.Names of 1st and 2nd defendants amended to read 'Issa Mjawiri Jabiri' and 'Stanley Ndinguri Wanjiku'; plaintiff to effect amendments within 14 days failing which the plaint be struck out with costs
  3. 3.Injunction barring the plaintiff from entering, possessing, dealing with or interfering with the applicant's possession of the suit land until completion of the suit
  4. 4.Land Registrar Kwale to cancel the entry registering the plaintiff as proprietor and cancel any title held by the plaintiff; register to revert to its state before filing of the suit
  5. 5.Plaintiff to bear the costs of the application

Authorities

#

Cases cited (1)

  • Patel v East Africa Cargo Handling Services Ltd
    [1974] E.A. 75
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent jurisdiction of the court to set aside ex parte judgment and rules of procedure on setting aside default judgment

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "George Stephen Macharia v Issa Njawiri Jabiri & 2 others [2021] KEELC 1831 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the extract (suit instituted by plaint filed 6 June 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/1831/eng@2021-09-28

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