Mutundi & 3 others v Gitege & 2 others (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 7767 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court allowed a land claimant to notify an untraceable landowner through newspaper adverts and notices on the disputed land itself.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Applicant has demonstrated that he is entitled to the grant of orders that he serves the Application through substituted service
Key legal issues
#Entitlement to substituted service where the defendant cannot be traced
The Applicant demonstrated diligent, documented attempts to trace and serve the 1st Respondent and complied with Order 5 Rules 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 17, entitling him to substituted service.
The court set out the hierarchy of service steps under Order 5: personal service, service on an authorised agent, service on an adult family member, and finally substituted service on application. A licensed process server swore an affidavit detailing repeated failed attempts to trace the 1st Respondent, with assistance from the Area Chief and village elder. The court was satisfied the statutory preconditions for substituted service were met, and granted leave subject to conditions on the mode, size and placement of the advertisement and affixation, with a compliance mention date.
Legal principles established
#- Before resorting to substituted service, a plaintiff must first attempt personal service, service on an authorised agent, and service on an adult family member under Order 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Where attempts at personal service fail, substituted service may be effected by affixing a copy in a conspicuous place in the court-house or on the defendant's last known residence or place of business, or by advertisement.
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to serve the 1st Respondent by substituted service, by advertisement in either the Daily Nation or the Standard Newspaper of at least an eighth (1/8th) of a page (not in the business section) within 21 days
- 2.Plaintiff to affix A3-size copies of the summons to enter appearance on the outside of the Defendant's gate and conspicuous places on the four corners of the parcel of land in issue, and other copies on the court Notice Board, within 7 days
- 3.Matter to be mentioned on 15th December 2025 to confirm compliance
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 5 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the event that the attempts referred to above fail, the Plaintifi may apply to the court for service through substituted service, as provided for under Rule 17.
First, the Applicant shall advertise the summons to enter appearance and the pleading herein within the next twenty-one (21) days in either the Daily Nation or the Standard Newspaper of at least an eighth (1/8th) of a page in size, and is should not be in the business section of the paper.
Second, the Plaintifi is required also to make copies of the summons to enter appearance and afix copies thereof in the A3 size of the paper on the outside of the Defendant's gate and conspicuous placed of the four (4) corners of the parcel of land in issue and other copies on the court Notice Board, within the next seven (7) days.
This matter shall be mentioned on 15th December, 2025 to confirm compliance of these orders.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal date inconsistencies: the Originating Summons is described as dated 3rd January 2025 and filed 23rd January 2025, but later referred to as 'filed on 8th January 2025'.
Ruling dated 6th November 2025 references an Application dated 8th October 2025 with an affidavit sworn the same day; the process server deposes to receiving instructions on 8th August 2025 - timeline internally consistent but the application date conflicts with the summons filing date stated earlier.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mutundi & 3 others v Gitege & 2 others (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 7767 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Originating Summons dated 3rd January 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7767/eng@2025-11-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.