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

REBECCAH MASESE ONCHWER V CHRISTINE CHERUTO KASONGO & 2 OTHERS [2009] KEHC 2427 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 2427 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
2427
Citation
[2009] KEHC 2427 (KLR)
Decided
12 June 2009
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureAppeal from a decision to allow an application to join interested partiesCoramA. O. Muchelule
Holding

The court allows the application to join Makario Obaja Basweti and Moturi Ratemo Ronald as interested parties to the suit.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Rebeccah Masese Onchweri, claimed that she was not a party to the subdivision and transfer of land parcel 539 into 690 and 689, and that the Defendant, Christine Cheruto Kasongo, fraudulently caused these transactions without her knowledge or consent. The Defendant denied perpetrating any fraud.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff's claim for a declaration that the subdivision and transfer were fraudulent and illegal is valid.
  2. Whether the Plaintiff's claim for the records at the lands registry to be corrected and rectified is valid.
  3. Whether the Plaintiff's claim for the Defendant to give up ownership and possession of 690 to the Plaintiff is valid.
  4. Whether the Plaintiff's application to join Makario Obaja Basweti and Moturi Ratemo Ronald as interested parties is valid.

Reasoning

The court finds that for the court to effectively and completely adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit, the Interested Parties have to be joined. The court does not believe that the parties will be prejudiced by the amendment of pleadings to join them.

Outcome

The application is allowed with costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Rules
  • Civil Procedure Act
Cases cited (1)
  • Phillips, Harrisons and Crosfield Ltd v. Kassam, [1982] KLR 458
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 0.0 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case