Jane Wanjiku Mwangi & another v Nathan Ndegwa Njeru [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Muranga
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
J.G. Kemei
Judgment Date
October 01, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Jane Wanjiku Mwangi & another v Nathan Ndegwa Njeru [2020] eKLR. Discover key legal insights and judgments impacting the parties involved.

Case Brief: Jane Wanjiku Mwangi & another v Nathan Ndegwa Njeru [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Jane Wanjiku Mwangi & Catherine Nyambura Mwangi v. Nathan Ndegwa Njeru
- Case Number: E.L.C No. 363 of 2017
- Court: Environment and Land Court at Murang’a
- Date Delivered: 1st October 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): J.G. Kemei
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The primary legal question for determination is whether the caution lodged on the title of the suit land (LR No loc19/RWATHIA/1675) by the 1st Plaintiff on 1st August 2006 should be removed by the District Land Registrar.

3. Facts of the Case:
The case involves Jane Wanjiku Mwangi and Catherine Nyambura Mwangi as the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs, respectively, and Nathan Ndegwa Njeru as the Defendant. The Plaintiffs had previously filed a suit concerning the land in question, but their case was dismissed, and the Defendant was adjudged the rightful owner of the land on 31st October 2018. The caution was lodged by the 1st Plaintiff, claiming a beneficial interest in the property prior to the suit's initiation. Following the dismissal of their case, the Defendant sought to have the caution removed, arguing that it hindered his enjoyment of the land.

4. Procedural History:
The Defendant filed a motion seeking the removal of the caution, supported by an affidavit and the grounds that the dismissal of the Plaintiffs' case extinguished the beneficial interests claimed by the cautioner. The Plaintiffs opposed the application, arguing that the court was functus officio and that the Defendant should file a fresh suit for the removal of the caution. The court heard oral arguments from both parties, reiterating their respective positions.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered Section 73(1) of the Land Registration Act, which provides that a caution may be withdrawn by the cautioner, removed by the court, or removed by the order of the Registrar. The court also referenced Article 162 of the Constitution and Section 2 of the Environment and Land Court Act, which confer original jurisdiction over land matters to the Environment and Land Court.

- Case Law: The court cited several precedents, including Wanjara & 2 Others v. Wanjara [2004] eKLR, which established that the Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction to entertain applications for the removal of cautions. In Christian Wafula Omusolo & 2 Others v. Pauline Jerotich & Another [2019] eKLR, the court held that a caution should be removed when it no longer serves a purpose, particularly when a judgment has been delivered dismissing the opposing party's claims. Additionally, in Kithu Mucamo v. Edward Kagane Kagoce [2019] eKLR, the court affirmed that there was no error in allowing the removal of a caution following a successful suit.

- Application: The court found that the caution should be removed based on the fact that the Plaintiffs had lost their case, and there were no pending appeals or stays of the judgment. Although the Defendant did not include a counterclaim for the removal of the caution in his pleadings, the court held that it could invoke its original jurisdiction to grant the application. The court emphasized that the rights of the parties had been fully determined and that litigation must come to an end to facilitate justice.

6. Conclusion:
The court granted the Defendant's application to remove the caution lodged on the suit land, directing the Land Registrar to proceed with the removal. The court also ordered the Defendant to bear the costs of the application in favor of the Plaintiffs, acknowledging that they were unnecessarily brought to court.

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

8. Summary:
The Environment and Land Court ruled in favor of Nathan Ndegwa Njeru, allowing the removal of the caution lodged by Jane Wanjiku Mwangi. The decision underscores the court's jurisdiction to address matters related to land ownership and the importance of finality in litigation. The ruling also highlights the necessity for parties to include all relevant claims and counterclaims in their pleadings to avoid unnecessary procedural complications.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Jane-Wanjiku-Mwangi--another-v-Nathan-Ndegwa-Njeru-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1430_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries