Jacob Njeru Karuku v Njagi Njuguna [2022] KEELC 2001 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed that a properly served three-month eviction notice satisfies the Land Act, and dismissed a landlord-tenant appeal with costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether a valid eviction notice under section 152E of the Land Act was issued before the eviction order
The court held that a 3-month notice to vacate dated 26th September 2017 was served through the firm of Njeru Ithiga & Co Advocates, satisfying section 152E of the Land Act.
The appellant contended that no notice was issued and that the eviction order was therefore improper. The court, examining the material on record, found it clear that notice had been given to the appellant. It noted that the respondent narrated how notice was issued through Njeru Ithiga & Co. Advocates, a 3-month notice dated 26th September 2017, and that the proper procedure had been followed.
Whether the learned magistrate's ruling complied with Order 21 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules and whether she considered the appellant's submissions
The court found the ruling did address the point for determination (eviction) and that the magistrate expressly recorded that she had gone through submissions filed by both sides.
The appellant argued the ruling was devoid of points for consideration and reasons, contrary to Order 21 Rule 4, and that his submissions were ignored. The court perused the impugned ruling and was satisfied the magistrate addressed the issue of eviction and noted the dismissal of the High Court appeal. The ruling also clearly stated that both sides filed submissions and that she had gone through them, which the court found to be sufficient proof the appellant's submissions were considered.
Whether the decision appealed against was against the weight of evidence
The court held the learned magistrate arrived at a just decision based on the evidence, the appellant having lost in the tribunal, the Provincial Appeals Committee and the High Court (Chuka ELC 14 of 2017, dismissed for want of prosecution).
The court traced the litigation history: the respondent won in Igambang'ombe LDT No. 4 of 2008, the appeal to the Provincial Appeals Committee (No. 124 of 2009) was lost, and the appeal to the High Court, Chuka ELC 14 of 2017, was dismissed for want of prosecution for non-attendance. Despite losing all these cases, the appellant refused to vacate, prompting the application for eviction that produced the impugned ruling, which the court found justified.
Legal principles established
#- An eviction from private land under section 152E of the Land Act requires service of a notice of not less than three months before the intended eviction.
- On a first appeal, the court has a duty to evaluate, re-assess and re-analyse the evidence on record to determine whether the conclusions reached by the learned magistrate were justified.
Court orders
#- 1.The Ruling of the Honourable court dated 8th April 2021 is upheld
- 2.The Appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrate's Court at Chuka
- Chuka LDT 15 of 2009
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Environment and Land Court from the ruling of the Senior Resident Magistrate in Chuka LDT 15 of 2009
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jacob Njeru Karuku v Njagi Njuguna [2022] KEELC 2001 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Chuka ELC Appeal No E003 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/2001/eng@2022-01-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.