Martin Wanyonyi Njabikha & another (Suing as the legal representatives of the Estate of the late Hezekiel Njabikha v Julius Namaswa Njabikha & 3 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Environment and Land Court at Bungoma
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Hon. Boaz N. Olao
Judgment Date
September 30, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the 2020 eKLR case summary of Martin Wanyonyi Njabikha & Another v Julius Namaswa Njabikha & Others. Delve into the legal insights and implications surrounding the estate of the late Hezekiel Njabikha.]\

Case Brief: Martin Wanyonyi Njabikha & another (Suing as the legal representatives of the Estate of the late Hezekiel Njabikha v Julius Namaswa Njabikha & 3 others [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Martin Wanyonyi Njabikha & Anthony Nyongesa Njavikha (Suing as the legal representatives of the Estate of the late Hezekiel Njabikha) v. Julius Namaswa Njabikha & Others
- Case Number: ELC Case No. 5 of 2019
- Court: Environment and Land Court at Bungoma
- Date Delivered: 30th September 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. Boaz N. Olao
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues for resolution include:
1. Whether the sub-division and transfer of land parcel NO NDIVISI/MAKUSELWA/527, which was originally owned by the deceased, were conducted fraudulently by the 1st defendant in collusion with the other defendants.
2. Whether the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – Kenya Registered Trustees should be substituted as a party in the proceedings to reflect the proper ownership of the land.

3. Facts of the Case:
The plaintiffs, Martin Wanyonyi Njabikha and Anthony Nyongesa Njavikha, acting as legal representatives of the estate of the late Hezekiel Njabikha, filed a plaint against their brother, Julius Namaswa Njabikha (1st defendant), and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – Kenya Registered Trustees (2nd defendant), among others. They allege that the 1st defendant fraudulently sub-divided and transferred their deceased father's land (originally parcel NO NDIVISI/MAKUSELWA/527) into parcels NO NDIVISI/MAKUSELWA/2087, 2088, and 2089 before succession had been completed. The 2nd and 3rd defendants claim they acted in good faith as bona fide purchasers.

4. Procedural History:
The plaintiffs filed their plaint on 12th March 2019, and the defendants filed a joint defense denying the allegations of fraud. The 1st defendant has not yet responded. Subsequently, the 2nd and 3rd defendants filed a Chamber Summons on 18th June 2020, seeking to substitute the 2nd defendant in the proceedings with the correct legal entity, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – Kenya Registered Trustees. The application was unopposed, and the court ordered that the proper party be included to ensure effective adjudication of the case.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered the provisions of the Civil Procedure Act and Rules, specifically Section 1A, 1B, and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, and Order 1 Rules 3, 10(2), and 10(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules, which govern the substitution and addition of parties in civil proceedings.

- Case Law: The court referenced the importance of including all necessary parties to prevent any violation of property rights and ensure justice. The principles established in previous cases underscore the necessity of having the registered owner present in litigation concerning their property.

- Application: The court applied the rules by recognizing that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – Kenya Registered Trustees is the registered proprietor of one of the disputed parcels (NO NDIVISI/MAKUSELWA/2088). The court reasoned that failing to include the correct party could lead to confusion and injustice, particularly if the final judgment required changes to the land register.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled in favor of substituting the 2nd defendant with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – Kenya Registered Trustees. The plaint was to be amended accordingly, ensuring that all relevant parties were properly identified for effective resolution of the ownership dispute.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling.

8. Summary:
The court's decision to allow the substitution of the 2nd defendant highlights the importance of accurately identifying parties in property disputes to uphold justice and protect ownership rights. This case reinforces procedural fairness in civil litigation and the necessity of involving all relevant parties in disputes concerning land ownership. The ruling is significant as it sets a precedent for ensuring that the legal owners are included in proceedings affecting their property rights.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Martin-Wanyonyi-Njabikha--another-Suing-as-the-legal-representatives-of-the-Estate-of-the-late-Hezekiel-Njabikha-v-Julius-Namaswa-Njabikha--3-others-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1256_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries