Al'amin & another v Land Adjudication & Settlement Scheme Officer Kilifi County & 2 others; Kogo & 83 others (Intended Defendant) (Environment & Land Case E033 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 521 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Mombasa's Land Court joined over 80 long-term occupants to a land dispute and blocked any dealings with the plot until the case is decided.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Intended Defendants ought to be joined in the suit
They are necessary parties whose presence will result in complete settlement of all questions; joinder allowed under Order 1 Rules 3 and 10(2).
The court applied Order 1 Rules 3 and 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules and the principles in Civicon, Joseph Njau Kingori, Departed Asians Property Custodian Board and Meme v Republic. All parties acknowledged the Intended Defendants and their families had long resided on the suit property, erected permanent structures, farmed, buried their dead there and worshipped there. Their interest directly affects the reliefs sought, and joinder avoids multiplicity of suits.
Whether the Land Registrar Mombasa should be joined as an interested party
Joinder of the Land Registrar as interested party allowed; the proceedings were still alive and the Registrar's presence will help the court understand the history of the suit property.
The court defined an interested party using Rule 2 of the Mutunga Rules, Black's Law Dictionary, and the Supreme Court's tests in Communications Commission of Kenya v Royal Media Services and Francis K. Muruatetu, requiring an identifiable proximate stake, demonstrated prejudice on non-joinder, and relevance of intended submissions. Since the suit was pending at interlocutory stage, the threshold was met and the Registrar's joinder would aid just determination of the title dispute.
Whether the Applicants are entitled to orders of inhibition
Inhibition order granted and to be registered against the suit property pending hearing and determination, to preserve the substratum of the case.
Relying on Section 68(1),(2) & (3) of the Land Registration Act and Regulation 79 of the Land Registration (General) Regulations, 2017, the court held inhibition is a prohibitory order preserving land from dealings. The conditions (risk of alienation, suit rendered nugatory, arguable case) were satisfied; per Mugah v Kunga status quo orders should issue in land matters to preserve the subject matter, and it was in the interest of justice to preserve the suit land.
Who bears the costs of the application
Costs to be in the cause, notwithstanding the general costs-follow-the-event principle.
The court reiterated Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and authorities that costs follow the event and the successful party is typically entitled to costs absent compelling reasons. However, as the suit was still at an interlocutory stage with the main dispute yet to be heard, the court elected not to award costs immediately and instead placed them in the cause.
Legal principles established
#- Joinder of a party is discretionary and must be exercised judiciously; a party need only demonstrate sufficient interest, which need not ultimately succeed.
- A person seeking joinder must move the court during the pendency of alive proceedings.
- An inhibition order requires showing that the suit property is at risk of disposal or alienation, that refusal would render the suit nugatory, and that the applicant has an arguable case.
- Costs follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.
Court orders
#- 1.Notice of Motion application dated 3rd July, 2024 allowed
- 2.Intended Defendants joined as Defendants in the suit
- 3.Land Registrar Mombasa joined as an interested party to the suit
- 4.Order of inhibition issued directed at the Interested Party, to be registered in respect of Plot Number MN/III/553-Original Number MN/III/284/5 pending hearing and determination of the suit
- 5.Plaintiffs granted 7 days to file an Amended Plaint; Defendants granted 14 days to file and serve their Defence; Plaintiffs granted 7 days to file Replies to the Defence
- 6.Matter to be mentioned on 20th March, 2025 before Hon. Mr. Justice Olola for further directions and Pre-Trial Conference under Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
- 7.Costs of the Notice of Motion dated 3rd July, 2024 to be in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 50 and 159 of the Constitution of Kenya; Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 21; Order 1 Rules 3, 10(2), 14 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Al'amin & another v Land Adjudication & Settlement Scheme Officer Kilifi County & 2 others; Kogo & 83 others (Intended Defendant) (Environment & Land Case E033 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 521 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment (Notice of Motion application dated 3rd July, 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/521/eng@2025-02-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.