Kiambati (Suing on His Behalf and the Estate of Salome Wangui Kiambati Deceased) v Mangare (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of Stephen Karanjan - Deceased) & another (Environment and Land Appeal E072 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 5653 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court awarded a man nearly Kshs 1 million because he was evicted under court orders meant for someone else.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiffs in the trial court had locus standi
The Plaintiffs were properly before the Court; grants of letters of administration were issued in respect of both estates and the issue had been settled in the Ruling of 31/5/17 and never challenged.
The trial court had dismissed the claims of the estates for want of representation, but the record showed grants issued on 22/4/2010 in the estate of Salome Wangui and on 8/11/2007 in the estate of Stephen Karanja Kiambati. The locus issue had already been canvassed in prior proceedings culminating in the Ruling of 31/5/17 and was never challenged by the Respondents. The appellate court therefore found the trial court erred in nullifying the claims.
Whether the 2nd Respondent was liable for the eviction and demolition
Yes. In re-examination the 2nd Respondent admitted executing the eviction; even if absent, he approved the demolition and stood to benefit as co-owner of the suit land.
The eviction orders targeted only Serah Mondo, not the Plaintiffs, making the eviction wrongful. The 2nd Respondent's re-examination admission ('We executed the eviction in 1995') established involvement. He had been allocated the suit land via the confirmation of grant dated 1/4/1985 and title issued 24/1/1986, so he had an interest in evicting the Plaintiffs to take over the land.
Quantum of damages
General damages of Kshs 350,000/- awarded for the arbitrary eviction and demolition; special damages of Kshs 633,000/- allowed as pleaded, proved and unchallenged.
The Appellant was evicted without basis in law and houses were demolished arbitrarily, but he rebuilt on the land afterwards, informing the general damages award. A valuation report dated 11/10/1995 quantifying reinstatement costs was not challenged by the 2nd Respondent and was therefore taken as believable.
Legal principles established
#- A first appellate court must re-evaluate, reassess and re-analyze the evidence and draw its own conclusions, while making due allowance for not having seen or heard the witnesses.
- A party who files suit on behalf of the estate of a deceased person must first obtain letters of administration.
- Eviction executed pursuant to court orders directed at a third party is wrongful and without justifiable cause as against persons not named in the orders.
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal be and is hereby allowed
- 2.The Judgment of the lower Court dated the 27/7/22 be set aside and Judgement is entered as prayed in the plaint
- 3.Special damages in the sum of Kshs 633,000/- is allowed
- 4.General damages in the sum of Kshs 350,000/- is awarded
- 5.Costs of the suit in the trial Court and on appeal is in favour of the Appellant
- On appeal from
- Magistrates' Court (trial Court)
- CMCC No 353 of 2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction under Section 78 of the Civil Procedure Act over the trial court's judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kiambati (Suing on His Behalf and the Estate of Salome Wangui Kiambati Deceased) v Mangare (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of Stephen Karanjan - Deceased) & another (Environment and Land Appeal E072 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 5653 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Appeal from CMCC No 353 of 2018 (formerly ELC No 892 of 2015, formerly Nairobi HCCC No 479 of 1998). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/5653/eng@2024-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.