Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedELCLA E063 OF 2024· [2026] KEELC 6115 (KLR)

Julius Katana Kithi v Kazungu Fande George & 9 Others

Environment and Land Court
30 September 2026
MNMwangi Njoroge
974 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Malindi dismissed a landowner's bid to overturn a magistrate's ruling and get parcel numbers, ruling those requests belonged in the wrong court.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Malindi (Mwangi Njoroge, J) on an application dated 31st October 2024 filed by the appellant, Julius Katana Kithi, in an appeal against a ruling of the principal magistrate in land adjudication proceedings. The application, which had been reinstated by order of 17th June 2026, sought: setting aside of the magistrate's ruling and all consequential orders pending the appeal; allowance of the appeal and entry of judgment for the appellant as prayed in the plaint dated 15th March 2021; an order compelling the 10th respondent to issue the appellant with parcel numbers for portions of the suit land, including portions adjudicated to the 1st to 5th respondents and named third parties, allegedly registered in disregard of an injunctive order issued on 27th April 2021; and costs in the cause. The appellant asserted the land was arbitrarily registered to persons not entitled to it, some of whom had admitted in writing the portions were not theirs, and that parcel numbers were needed to file objection cases with the Land Arbitration Committee at Kilifi. The 1st to 4th respondents opposed through replying affidavits, arguing the prayers were untenable at the present stage, sought setting aside of orders under appeal, and raised new issues never placed before the magistrates' court. The court, disposing of the application on written submissions, agreed with the respondents: setting aside the ruling under appeal would leave no appeal to determine; judgment could not be entered before the appeal was heard; and information-related prayers belonged at the trial court level. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondents on 30th September 2026.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether interlocutory orders could be granted pending the appeal

Holding

The application lacked merit; the prayers were untenable at the appellate stage

Reasoning

The court agreed with the respondents that setting aside the ruling under appeal would extinguish the appeal, and that entering judgment as prayed in the plaint before the appeal is determined is impermissible. The information-related prayers raised matters for the trial court, not the appellate forum.

p. 5
02

Proper forum for orders compelling issuance of parcel numbers

Holding

The trial court, not the appellate court, is the appropriate forum

Reasoning

The court held that the prayers seeking information from the 10th respondent, which would enable the applicant to file land objection cases with the Land Adjudication Committee at Kilifi, should be pursued before the appropriate trial forum rather than at the appellate level.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • A prayer to set aside the very ruling under appeal cannot be granted because it would destroy the appeal itself
  • Applications for information/orders to enable filing of land objections belong at the trial court, not the appellate level

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 31st October 2024 is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the respondents
On appeal from
Principal Magistrate's Court
MLDELCCNOE040/26
Jurisdiction invoked
Appellate jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over appeals from the magistrates' courts (statutory, not expressly cited in the ruling)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Julius Katana Kithi v Kazungu Fande George & 9 Others", Case Analysis (2026). ELCLA E063 OF 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/6115/eng@2026-09-30

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.