Njiru Micheni Nthiga v Governor, Tharaka Nithi County Government & 5 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
P. M. Njoroge
Judgment Date
October 21, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the Njiru Micheni Nthiga v Governor, Tharaka Nithi County Government & 5 others [2020] eKLR case summary. Discover key legal insights and implications for governance and public service accountability.

Case Brief: Njiru Micheni Nthiga v Governor, Tharaka Nithi County Government & 5 others [2020] eKLR
1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Njiru Micheni Nthiga (Suing as a Legal Representative and Administrator of the Estate of the Deceased Leonard R.I. Nthiga) v. The Governor, Tharaka Nithi County Government & Others
- Case Number: Chuka ELC Case No. 02 of 2019
- Court: Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Date Delivered: October 21, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): P. M. Njoroge
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues presented before the court include:
1. Whether the District Land Registrar and District Surveyor should be directed to provide comprehensive reports on the acquisition and location of the Suit Land LR. MAGUMONI/THUITA/779.
2. Whether the court should conduct a site visit to assess the extent of damage caused to the building on the Suit property.
3. Who should bear the costs of the application.

3. Facts of the Case:
The plaintiff, Njiru Micheni Nthiga, is acting as the legal representative and administrator of the estate of the deceased Leonard R.I. Nthiga. The plaintiff claims ownership of the Suit Land LR. MAGUMONI/THUITA/779 and asserts that the defendants, including the County Government of Tharaka Nithi and other officials, have wrongfully demolished buildings on this land, allegedly claiming it is located on a road reserve. The plaintiff contends that the land was lawfully acquired and is not on a road reserve, which the defendants dispute.

4. Procedural History:
The application dated February 27, 2020, was filed by the plaintiff seeking orders for the District Land Registrar and District Surveyor to provide reports regarding the disputed land. The defendants opposed the application, arguing that the plaintiff's claims were unfounded and that the application was a mere fishing expedition. The court directed that the matter be heard through written submissions, which were duly filed by both parties, leading to the court's ruling on October 21, 2020.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The application was grounded in sections of the Environment and Land Court Act, the Civil Procedure Act, and the Constitution of Kenya, particularly focusing on the jurisdiction and powers of the court to order inspections and obtain evidence.

- Case Law: The court referenced previous cases such as *Showcase Properties Limited v. Bamburi Special Products Limited* where site visits were deemed beneficial for understanding the issues at hand. The court also cited *John K Koech v. Peter Chepkwony* which supported the notion that a site visit can aid in clarifying matters before the court.

- Application: The court determined that the plaintiff's request for reports from the District Land Registrar and District Surveyor was inappropriate as it sought to compel the court to gather evidence on behalf of the plaintiff. The court emphasized that it is the plaintiff's responsibility to present evidence and that allowing such requests would amount to the court engaging in a fishing expedition. Consequently, the court dismissed the application, stating that the matter should proceed to be heard expeditiously.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled against the plaintiff's application, emphasizing the necessity for parties to present their evidence rather than relying on the court to seek it. The dismissal of the application reinforced the principle that judicial resources should not be used to uncover evidence for a party. The court ordered that costs would be in the cause.

7. Dissent:
No dissenting opinions were noted in the ruling, as the decision was unanimous.

8. Summary:
The Environment and Land Court dismissed the plaintiff's application for orders compelling the District Land Registrar and District Surveyor to provide reports on the disputed land. The court found that the plaintiff had not met the necessary burden to justify the orders sought and emphasized the importance of parties presenting their own evidence. The ruling underscored the principle that courts should not be used to seek evidence on behalf of litigants, ultimately promoting a more efficient judicial process.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Njiru-Micheni-Nthiga-v-Governor-Tharaka-Nithi-County-Government--5-others-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2370_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries