Nyutho v Karanja & 5 others (Environment and Land Case E98 of 2013) [2025] KEELC 6354 (KLR)

iv. The intended 6th Defendant has no identifiable interests in the subject property and has demonstrated any title or registered instrument in their favour v. The application has no merit and is made in bad faith. vi. The application is grossly and fundamentally defective in law, incompetent, bad in law and non-sustainable. 3. The court directed the parties to file written submissions. Counsel for the Plaintifi submitted that the intended 6th Defendant has no identifiable stake in the property and the application was only brought about so as to delay the hearing. 4. The sole issue for determination is whether the application is merited. Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules provides as follows:“ The Court may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without Application to either party and on such terms as may appear to the Court to be just, order that the name of any party improperly joined, whether as Plaintifi or Defendant, be struck out, and that the name of any person who ought to be joined whether as Plaintifi or Defendant, or whose presence before Court may be necessary in order to enable Court efiectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit, be added”. 5. It is therefore evident that a party seeking joinder must demonstrate how the suit would afiect his interests. In the case of Direct Line Assurance Co. Ltd v Attorney General [2011] eKLR the Court pronounced itself as follows: “ The law is that only those who are entitled to a claim or be afiected by the outcome can legitimately seek protection from the Court. The applicant has not demonstrated how the legal notice would afiect its interests and that of the public it purports to represent. It is not every person who can approach the Court for redress of his grievances but persons with legitimate interests and stake in the outcome and the efiects of the decision complained against.” 6. 7. Further the Supreme Court in a subsequent case of Francis K. Muruateru & Ano v Republic & 5 Others [2016]eKLR set out the key elements for consideration in an Application for joinder as an Interested Party as follows:i. Joinder of a person because his presence will result in the complete settlement of all the question involved in the proceedings; ii. Joinder to provide protection for the rights of a party who would otherwise be adversely afiected in law iii. Joinder to prevent a likely course of proliferated litigation. In the case before this Court the Plaintifi has sued the defendants seeking nullification of titles registered in the names of the 2nd, 3rd and 5th defendants and for injunctive orders and damages for trespass. The intended 6th Defendant seeks to be enjoined on the basis that he has an identifiable stake. He has attached a sale agreement in support of his application. A reading of the sale agreement at clause 3 makes it evident that the intended defendant has only paid a deposit of Kshs 5,000,000 as the balance was to be paid upon completion of the agreement which has not happened. He is therefore not a necessary party as the 5th Defendant will adequately represent his interests in the suit. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6354/eng@2025-05-08 2

page 2 of 3

8. The court is enjoined under Section 1 A and B of the Civil Procedure Rules to give efiect to the overriding objectives which include; the just determination of the proceedings; the eficient disposal of the business of the Court; the eficient use of the available judicial and administrative resources; and the timely disposal of the proceedings, and all other proceedings in the Court, at a cost afiordable by the respective parties. 9. It would be ineficient disposal of the business of the court to add to a suit parties whose interests are already suficiently represented. In the circumstances I find that the application has no merit and is dismissed with costs to abide the outcome of the main suit. RULING SIGNED DATED AND DELIVERED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS THIS 8TH DAY OF MAY 2025 JUDY OMANGE JUDGE In the presence of Court Assistant Catherine Mr. Kirimi for Plaintifi Ms Wambua for 2nd and 3rd Defendant Mr. Mutemi for Mimba for 5th and 6th Defendant Mr. Gichuhi for 1st Defendant https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6354/eng@2025-05-08 3

page 3 of 3