Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Kiraithe v John; Kastilal & another (Interested Parties) (Environment & Land Case 73 of 2015) [2024] KEELC 436 (KLR)

Kiraithe v John; Kastilal & another (Interested Parties) (Environment & Land Case 73 of 2015) [2024] KEELC 436 (KLR) (31 January 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 436 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU ENVIRONMENT & LAND CASE 73 OF 2015 CK NZILI, J JANUARY 31, 2024 BETWEEN JACKSON KIRAITHE ............................................................................... PLAINTIFF AND THOMAS KINOTI JOHN ..................................................................... DEFENDANT AND BALDEV KUMAR KASTILAL ............................................... INTERESTED PARTY QUADOCO ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY - NINE LIMITED ................................................................................... INTERESTED PARTY RULING 1. The court is asked by an application dated 19.6.2023 to correct some typing errors appearing in the judgment for the implementation of this court's decree. 2. Specifically, the applicant decree holder has identified parcels No.614 and 699 as omitted; misdescribed suit land; and the wrongful inclusion of 629 instead of L.R No. 299. 3. Further, the applicant has fiagged ofi the date of gazette No.2771 as 13.5.2019 instead of 13.5.1999. 4. The applicant terms the identified items as clerical errors, which this court should rectify under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules. 5. It is not in dispute that the plaintifi filed an amended plaint dated 6.8.2004, where the suit property was described as L.R No.7143, now L.R No. Timau/Timau/Block 7/1-763, parcels No's 283, 578, 613, 614, 625, 626, 628 and 699. In the evidence tendered at the hearing, the applicant led evidence in line with the said pleadings. Paragraphs 1, 50, and 88 of the judgment are not in tandem with the amended plaint and paragraphs 3, 32, 52, 57, and 61 of the judgment. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/436/eng@2024-01-31 1

page 1 of 2

6. Consequently, and in the exercise of powers of this court under Sections 99 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act, I allow the application. An amended judgment and a decree shall be issued refiecting the above changes. There will be no order as to costs. DATED, SIGNED, AND DELIVERED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS/OPEN COURT AT MERU ON THIS 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2024 In presence of C.A Kananu/Mukami Miss Kerubo for Nyaga for applicant Mr. Kariuki for 5th & 6th respondents HON. CK NZILI JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/436/eng@2024-01-31 2

page 2 of 2

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.