Kimani v Karanja (Sued as legal representative of the Estate of Maina Philip Karanja Mwangi - Deceased) (Environment and Planning Originating Summons E001 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2642 (KLR) (5 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 2642 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MURANGA ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING ORIGINATING SUMMONS E001 OF 2025 MN GICHERU, J MAY 5, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 7, 17 AND 38 OF LIMITATION OF ACTION ACT ORDER 37 RULES 7 AND 19 CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES SECTION 3A OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES SECTION 3A OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE ACT AND ALL THE OTHER ENABLING PROVISION OF THE LAW. BETWEEN AMBROSE MWANGI KIMANI ................................................................ PLAINTIFF AND TEKLAR NYAMBURA KARANJA (SUED AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MAINA PHILIP KARANJA MWANGI DECEASED) ............................................................................................. DEFENDANT RULING 1. 2. This ruling is on the notice of application dated 28-3-2025. The application which is by the Plaintifi is brought under Order 5 rule 17(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act. It seeks one main prayer. 1. That the Court to order that the originating summons herein to be served upon the Respondent, Teklar Nyambura Karanja, through substituted service. 2. That the costs of the application be provided for. The motion is based on three (3) grounds and is supported by an afidavit sworn by the Plaintifi. The gist of the application is as follows. Firstly, the residence of the Defendant is not known. The Defendant is also not known to the Plaintifi. There is therefore no place where the Defendant can be served. Secondly, it is not easy to trace the Defendant’s residence. The only way of efiecting service is through an advertisement in the daily newspaper and registered post. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2642/eng@2026-05-05 1
page 1 of 2
3. On 18-11-2025, the Court directed that the Defendant be served through the chief of the area where the land is situated. When the case came up for mention on 10-2-2026, the Plaintifi’s counsel said that there was information that the Defendant had relocated to Kabati area. 4. Since the Plaintifi seeks to be declared the owner of land that is registered in the name of the deceased, the service must be certain and physical. It is not clear to me how the Plaintifi came to know that Teklar Nyambura Karanja is the legal representative of the registered owner of the suit land. It is not in the two afidavits on record or their annexures. It is also not clear why the order dated 10-2-2026 was not complied with. It is highly unlikely that the registered owner of the suit land is unknown to all the people in locality where the land is situated. It is for this reason that I find that his application dated 18-3-2025 is not merited. I direct that the order dated 18-11-2025 be complied with. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT MURANG’A THIS 5TH DAY OF MAY, 2026. M.N. GICHERU JUDGE. Delivered online in the presence of; Court Assistants – Jackline and Antony Mr Muturi Njoroge for the Plaintifi https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2642/eng@2026-05-05 2
page 2 of 2