Krop & 3 others v County Commander West Pokot County & 34 others (Environment & Land Case 118 of 2013 & 93 of 2018 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 844 (KLR)

The court found no evidence that the 14th to 35th respondents were parties to the decree, were served with the decree or eviction notice, or were agents, servants or employees of the initial 13 respondents. The applicants also failed to show particulars of knowledge and deliberate, willful breach. Consequently, no summons could issue against them and they were not held in contempt.

The decree carried a penal notice, service was proved by affidavit of service including service before the area Chief, and the respondents neither denied the decree's existence nor claimed compliance. Having been accorded an opportunity to respond through counsel and written submissions, they filed only a preliminary objection and never explained non-compliance. Staying on the land was described as forcible detainer.

The Deputy County Commander attributed non-enforcement to understaffing, hostility, and pending directions from the county security intelligence committee, but attached no correspondence or particulars of enforcement efforts and did not follow the eviction procedures in Sections 152A-I of the Land Act. The court held that limited resources do not excuse inaction against forcible detainer.

The court accepted that the firm of Lowasikou & Co. Advocates filed its Notice of Appointment without leave, which contravened Order 9 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and noted counsel's concession that the decree and eviction order bound the 2nd to 13th respondents. However, fair hearing was satisfied because all named parties were served and given an opportunity to respond.