Ekesa v Talitia District Hospital & another (Environment and Land Case 135 of 2013) [2026] KEELC 3169 (KLR) (20 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 3169 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT BUNGOMA ENVIRONMENT AND LAND CASE 135 OF 2013 AK BOR, J MAY 20, 2026 BETWEEN DR MULIANGA EKESA ........................................................................... PLAINTIFF AND TALITIA DISTRICT HOSPITAL ................................................... 1ST DEFENDANT FADDY MALABA ............................................................................ 2ND DEFENDANT RULING 1. Through the application dated 30/1/2026, the Plaintifi seeks to have the judgment delivered in Bungoma ELC Petition No. 5 of 2013 adopted in this suit in line with the ruling of 22/11/2017 and thereafter to have the suit marked as settled with no orders as to costs. The application was made on the grounds that this suit and Bungoma ELC Petition No. 5 of 2013 relate to the land known as West Bukusu/South Mateka/970 (the suit land) and that the parties in the two suits were the same or parties under whom they claim. An order was made in this suit on 22/11/2017 staying the suit pending the hearing and determination of the petition. Following the determination of the petition, the Plaintifi argues that it would be a waste of judicial time and the parties’ time if this suit were to be litigated over the same subject matter and parties or those under whom they claim. 2. The Plaintifi swore the supporting afidavit in which he deponed that the reliefs he sought in this suit were granted in ELC Petition No. 5 of 2013 and it will not serve any useful purpose for this suit to proceed to hearing. 3. The court directed parties to file short written submission on the application. Only the Plaintifi filed submissions. He submitted that the orders staying this suit pending the determination of the petition were granted with the consent of both parties. Having succeeded in the petition, the Plaintifi submitted that there is no need for this suit to proceed to trial. The Plaintifi relied on order 30 of Civil Procedure Rules regarding a test case and staying the other suit. He argued that he was claiming land that he https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3169/eng@2026-05-20 1
page 1 of 2
purchased from the petitioners and that a determination having been made in the test suit, then it follows that the judgment in the test suit should apply in this case. 4. The dispute over the suit land having been determined in Bungoma ELC Petition No. 5 of 2013, no useful purpose will be served if this suit were to proceed for trial. The suit is marked as settled with no orders as to costs. DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT BUNGOMA THIS 20TH DAY OF MAY 2026. K. BOR JUDGE In the presence of: Ms. H. Wanyama holding brief for Mr. O. Bwonchiri for the Plaintifi Court Assistant-Bett & Metrine No appearance for the Defendants https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3169/eng@2026-05-20 2
page 2 of 2