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

Amos Albert Njeru v District Land Registrar Imenti North/south District & 2 others

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU ELC PETITION NO. 18 OF 2016 AMOS ALBERT NJERU........................................PETITIONER VERSUS DISTRICT LAND REGISTRAR IMENTI NORTH/SOUTH DISTRICT.........1ST RESPONDENT JOHN BENDERA MWONGERA................2ND RESPONDENT THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL...........3RD RESPONDENT JUDGMENT 1. The document being referred to as a petition and dated 30.5.2016 has no date of filing (same fate befalls the verifying affidavit). There is no receipt to indicate that the document was ever filed. The petition is hence not properly presented before this court. 2. I also note that on 24.1.2017, the court gave directions for the District Surveyor to visit the scene to confirm whether the boundary between the two suit parcels is correct and to determine if any party has encroached on the other. The petitioner was to meet the costs of the scene visit. He did not comply. 3. The court also gave directions that the petition be argued by way of written submissions. The petitioner did not comply. 4. The upshot of my findings are that the petitioner has failed to properly present the petition and he has also failed to prosecute the same. 5. Needless to say that the dispute herein is a boundary dispute which does not fall in the ambit of a constitutional petition. 6. In the circumstances this suit is hereby dismissed with costs to respondent. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS DAY OF 7th MARCH, 2018 IN THE PRESENCE OF:Court Assistant: Janet/Galgalo Mugo for 2nd respondent Attorney General for 1st respondent absent Mutuma for petitioner HON. LUCY. N. MBUGUA ELC JUDGE

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.