Sofi’s Gallery Limited v Ananas Consolidated Group Limited (Environment and Land Case E037 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 869 (KLR)

January 2020 by which the Plaintifi allegedly took possession of the aforementioned premises and established a furniture retail and cofiee bistro business. He claims that the dispute raises issues on whether the Plaintifi was in occupation of the suit premises, whether the Defendant breached the Tenancy Agreement between them by restricting access to the Plaintifi and if the Plaintifi is entitled to compensation among others. 4. He claims that consolidation is necessary to avoid duplication of proceedings and save judicial time. Response 5. In opposition, the Defendant filed Grounds of Opposition and a replying afidavit sworn by its director, Yaacov Maimon. He contends that in ELCLC E365 OF 2024, the Plaintifi herein filed an application to have the said suit struck out for being sub judice this suit and vide a Ruling delivered on 22nd May 2025, the Court (Hon. Judge Charles Mbogo) determined that the cause of action and issues herein are not similar to the issues raised in the aforementioned suit. Further, that in ELCLC E365 OF 2024, the Plaintifi herein did not file a defence within the statutory timeline and as a consequence, the Defendant herein has sought interlocutory judgement against it, thus the instant application is meant to forestall interlocutory judgement in ELCLC E365 OF 2024 and delay determination of this matter, which has been adjourned three times at the instance of the Plaintifi. 6. The application was canvassed by way of written submissions. Submissions 7. The Plaintifi submits that this suit and ELCLC E365 OF 2024 raise The Plaintifi submits that this suit and ELCLC E365 OF 2024 raise identical facts and issues of law founded in the tenancy relationship between the Defendant and itself concerning the suit premises, to the extent that the defence in one matter constitutes the cause of action in the other. It argues that consolidation, which this Court has discretion to order promotes judicial economy and prevents inconsistent findings. Further, that the Defendant will not sufier any prejudice. 8. To buttress its averments, the Plaintifi relied on the following decisions: Nyati Security Guards & Services Ltd v Municipal Council of Mombasa [2004] eKLR; Law Society of Kenya v Centre for Human Rights & Democracy & 12 Others [2014] eKLR; Stumberg & Another v Potgeiter [1970] EA 32: Francis Mwangi v Consolidated Bank of Kenya [2018] eKLR and Selecta Kenya GmbH & Co. KG v Chase Bank (Kenya) Limited (In Receivership) [2020] eKLR. 9. On its part, the Respondent submits that the questions of law and fact are difierent in both cases and therefore, consolidation of the suits would not be justified. He points out that ELCLC E365 OF 2024 is a liquidated claim and that the Plaintifi herein has never filed a defence denying it owes the arrears claimed, prompting the Defendant to apply for interlocutory judgement, which is pending endorsement by the Court thus allowing consolidation at this point would be inconsistent with the Court’s duty to deal with cases justly, eficiently, expeditiously and would also occasion a great disadvantage on the Defendant as he would be driven from the seat of judgement. 10. To buttress its averments, the Defendant relied on the following decisions: Environment and Land Case No. 61 of 2020, Humphrey Kombe Kithi and Land Registrar, Kilifi County, The Attorney General, Ashok Doshi & Ali Taib. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/869/eng@2026-02-19 2

page 2 of 4

Analysis and Determination 11. Upon consideration of the instant Notice of Motion application including the respective afidavits and rivalling submissions, the only issue for determination is whether this suit should be consolidated with ELCLC E365 OF 2024. 12. The Plaintifi contends that the facts and issues raised in this suit and the aforementioned suit are similar. The Defendant avers that this Court (Hon. Judge Charles Mbogo) delivered a Ruling in ELCLC E365 OF 2024 on 22nd May 2025, in which he found that the issues in the said matter and in this matter are not similar. It also contends that a consolidation order would prejudice them and eject them from the seat of justice since they await their application for interlocutory judgement in ELCLC E365 OF 2024 to be endorsed. 13. From the Plaint in this matter, the Plaintifi claims damages for alleged constructive eviction as well as special and general damages for wrongful eviction among other prayers; whereas ELCLC E365 OF 2024 is a case filed by Ananas Consolidated Group Ltd seeking outstanding rent arrears, future rent and interest on outstanding rent. In ELCLC E365 OF 2024, vide a Notice of Motion dated 27th September 2024, the Defendants therein sought to strike out the said suit on the basis that it is subjudice the instant suit. 14. In a Ruling delivered on 22nd May 2025, this Court (Mbogo C Judge) at paragraph 16 stated that: “ …….it would only be fair that each party is given a chance to ventilate its issues. In this case the parties may agree on consolidation of the files so that the issues are determined once and for all.” 15. On consolidation of suits, Order 11 Rule 3 (1)(h) and (i) of the Civil Procedure Rules provides as follows: “ 3. (1) h) 16. With a view to furthering expeditious disposal of cases and case management the court shall within thirty days after the close of pleadings convene a Case Conference in which it shall; consider consolidation of suits;..” The Supreme Court stated as follows in Omoke v Kenyatta & 83 others (Petition 11 (E015) of 2021) [2021] KESC 27 (KLR): “ Consolidation of suits or appeals will be ordered where there are common questions of either law or fact in two or more suits or appeals and where it is desirable that all the related matters be disposed of at the same time.” 17. The same Court stated as follows in Law Society of Kenya v Centre for Human Rights & Democracy & 12 others [2014] eKLR: “ The essence of consolidation is to facilitate the eficient and expeditious disposal of disputes, and to provide a framework for a fair and impartial dispensation of justice to the parties. Consolidation was never meant to confer any undue advantage upon the party that seeks it, nor was it intended to occasion any disadvantage towards the party that opposes it.” https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/869/eng@2026-02-19 3

page 3 of 4

18. Further, in Abdalla v. Hassan & 15 Others (Civil Suit No. 210 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 13582 (KLR) (5 October 2022) (Ruling), it was stated that: “ From these cases and precedents, the legal ratio and holdings are that, the essence of consolidation essentially are;(a) to facilitate the eficient and expeditious disposal of disputes and(b) to provide a framework for a fair and impartial dispensation of justice to the parties. At all costs and as a matter of principle, consolidation of cases should never be meant to confer any undue advantage upon the party nor should it be intended to occasion any disadvantage towards the party that opposes it.’’ 19. On perusal of the Court record in the two matters, I note the fulcrum of the dispute in both suits revolves around a tenancy agreement on LR No. 1870/1/219. While the Plaintifi herein seeks for a declaration that its eviction was unlawful and for general and special damages, the Plaintifi in ELCLC E365 OF 2024 prays for judgement to be entered against the Plaintifi herein. Further, it seeks to be paid outstanding rent, future rent and interest. 20. Based on the facts as presented while relying on the legal provisions I have quoted and associating myself with the cited decisions, at this juncture I find that consolidation of these suits is necessary. I opine that there are common questions of law and fact and it will be pertinent if the said related matters were to be disposed ofi at the same time as it will save precious judicial time. Further, it will facilitate the eficient and expeditious disposal of dispute herein. 21. It is against the foregoing that I find the instant application merited and will allow it. 22. Costs will be in the cause. DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 CHRISTINE OCHIENG JUDGE In the presence of: Hasham for Plaintifi/Applicant Mutwiri for Defendant/Respondent Court Assistant: Joan https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/869/eng@2026-02-19 4

page 4 of 4