Saina & another v Commissioner of Lands & 11 others (Environment and Land Case 7B of 2019) [2026] KEELC 1386 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to revive a land suit dismissed for delay, ruling the claimants failed to prove the court file was ever misplaced.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicants established grounds to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the suit
The dismissal order of 03.06.2024 was not set aside and the suit was not reinstated; the application was dismissed with costs to the 7th, 8th and 9th Respondents
The Applicants alleged the file was misplaced in Nairobi and that they were unaware of the transfer to Eldoret and of the notice to show cause. The court found no documentary proof of misplacement; letters of 17.01.2019 and 12.04.2022 showed the file was transmitted and its receipt copied to the Applicants' advocates. The Notice of Dismissal dated 24.05.2024, showing the 03.06.2024 hearing date, was served on counsel on 27.05.2024 by a process server. Indolence was therefore established and no sufficient grounds for reinstatement were shown.
Whether the application was merited
The application was held not merited, following from the finding on Issue No. 1
Having found that the Applicants were aware of the transfer and were duly served with the Notice of Dismissal, the court held that no good or sufficient grounds existed to exercise its discretion to set aside the dismissal. The merits question was resolved as a direct consequence of the findings on service and the lack of proof of misplacement, without any separate analysis.
Legal principles established
#- A party alleging that a court file was misplaced bears the burden of proving that allegation, failing which the claim of misplacement fails.
- Where a letter from the Deputy Registrar confirming receipt of a transferred file is copied to a party's advocates and the party does not rebut receipt, the court presumes it was served and the party is deemed aware of the transfer.
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion Dated 20.02.2025 is not merited and therefore dismissed
- 2.The Applicants are condemned to pay costs of the present application to the 7th, 8th and 9th Respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over a notice of motion to set aside a dismissal order and reinstate the suit
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Saina & another v Commissioner of Lands & 11 others (Environment and Land Case 7B of 2019) [2026] KEELC 1386 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC No. 7 B of 2019 (formerly Nairobi Constitutional Petition No. 416 of 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/1386/eng@2026-03-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.