SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

MISTRY JADVA PARBAT & CO. LTD v LAND REGISTRAR, KILIFI [2009] KEHC 1601 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 1601 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1601
Citation
[2009] KEHC 1601 (KLR)
Decided
30 July 2009
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureApplication for Judicial Review Orders of Certiorari, Prohibition and MandamusCoramM. ODERO
Holding

The Preliminary Objection is dismissed with costs to the Ex-parte Applicant.

Facts

The applicant, Mistry Jadva Parbat & Co. Ltd, sought to stay the judicial review proceedings pending the hearing and determination of a Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 126 of 2009. The respondent, Land Registrar, Kilifi, opposed the stay.

Issues

  1. Whether the court has inherent jurisdiction to issue a stay order in judicial review proceedings.
  2. Whether the Malindi case High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 18 of 2008 is relevant to the present proceedings.

Reasoning

The court found that the matters raised by Mr. Kilonzo do not qualify as points of law and that the issue of the Malindi case and its relevance to the present proceedings is a disputed fact. The court distinguished the Manca Francesco case from the present case, stating that the findings in the Manca Francesco case would not apply to this present case.

Outcome

The Preliminary Objection is dismissed.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Registered Land Act Cap. 300 Laws of Kenya
Cases cited (3)
  • Mukisa Biscuit and Manufacturing Co. Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1969
  • Manca Francesco v Registrar of Titles Mombasa and 2 others Misc. Appl. 7 of 2007
  • Kuria Mbae v The Land Adjudication Officer Chuka Misc. Appl. 257/1987
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case