Keesi & 2 others (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Jonathan Keesi Ngunzi – Deceased) v Keesi & 9 others (Environment and Land Case 337 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 4923 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court allowed plaintiffs to expand their case by adding 30 new defendants, amending their claim, and serving papers by newspaper advertisement and the local Chief.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether Plaintiffs should be granted leave to further amend the amended plaint dated 5th June, 2023
- 2.Whether joinder of the 11th – 40th Defendants should be allowed
- 3.Whether leave to substitute the 3rd Defendant with the Administrators ad litem of his Estate
- 4.Whether leave to effect service to the 11th to 39th proposed Defendants by way of substituted service ought to be granted
Key legal issues
#Leave to further amend the plaint
Amendment allowed; amendments amplify rather than alter the cause of action and no prejudice was demonstrated
The court applied Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 8 Rule 3, adopting the Central Kenya Ltd principles. It found the amendments material to effective determination, that the cause of action was amplified not substituted, that the application followed promptly after the contempt proceedings concluded, and that no prejudice capable of compensation in costs was shown.
Joinder of 11th to 40th Defendants
Joinder merited: the proposed defendants are alleged to have unlawfully benefited from unauthorized sale, and the Land Registrar is necessary for effectual execution of reliefs
Guided by Order 1 Rules 3 and 10(2) and the Nyalwanga decision, the court held that the proposed defendants were properly joinable since the claim for recovery of land against them arises from the same transactions, and the Land Registrar's presence as custodian of land records is necessary for effectual execution of reliefs.
Substitution of the deceased 3rd Defendant
Substitution with administrators ad litem allowed once the succession cause is determined
The death of the 3rd Defendant was uncontested; the plaintiffs had diligently petitioned for a grant ad litem in Makueni MCSUCCMISC/E090/2025. The court found substitution in the interest of justice and consistent with Order 1A for expeditious disposal.
Substituted service of summons
Substituted service by advertisement and through the Chief's Office merited given hostility toward plaintiffs
Relying on Order 5 Rule 17, the court found physical service risky because the proposed defendants had been hostile to the plaintiffs. It adopted Makau v Mbira, holding that where personal service is impracticable, substituted service is appropriate so that parties become aware of the case.
Legal principles established
#- Amendments should be freely allowed at any stage provided there is no undue delay, no new or inconsistent cause of action, and no prejudice or injustice that cannot be compensated in costs
- A person may be joined as defendant where they ought to have been joined under Order 1 Rule 3 or where their presence is necessary to enable the court to adjudicate on all questions in the suit
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to the Plaintiffs to further amend the Amended Plaint dated 5th June, 2023 within 14 days
- 2.Leave granted to join the proposed 11th to 39th Defendants as Defendants in the suit
- 3.Leave granted to join the Land Registrar Makueni as the 40th Defendant
- 4.Leave granted to substitute the 3rd Defendant with the Administrators ad litem of his Estate upon determination of MCSUCCMISC/E090/2025
- 5.Leave granted to effect substituted service upon the 11th to 39th Defendants by advertisement in the Daily Nation and through the area Chief's Office in Kilala Location
- 6.Costs of the application shall be in the cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution; Section 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act; Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 1 Rule 10 and Order 8 Rules 3 and 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules
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.
It was contended that a raft of fourteen new prayers have been proposed in the draft further amended plaint which changes the substance of the suit and blurs the original issues. That is not the case whatsoever.
No apparent prejudice has been demonstrated by the Defendants if the amendments sought are allowed.
the application for joinder of Defendants is merited as it ensures that the dispute is settled with finality.
In view of the circumstances of the case, it is the finding of this court that an order for substituted service of summons is merited.
Costs of the application shall be in the cause.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal date inconsistency: the supporting affidavit and the deponent's death sequence suggest anomalies - the application is dated 22nd October 2025 but counsel submits the plaintiffs learned of the 3rd Defendant's demise 'on 18th September, 2025' while a further affidavit is sworn '23rd February, 2026' yet submissions are dated 9th March, 2026 and the ruling delivered 30th July, 2026; the death date of 26th October, 2024 pre-dates the 2013-filed suit's framing. These dates are internally odd but not necessarily contradictory.
The deponent states acts of trespass occurred between '25th July, 2013' and the present, while undisputed facts place the cause of action between 2006 and 2024 - a minor chronological divergence
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Keesi & 2 others (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Jonathan Keesi Ngunzi – Deceased) v Keesi & 9 others (Environment and Land Case 337 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 4923 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC NO. 337 OF 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4923/eng@2026-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.