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

Wilson Waithaka Gitau v Kenya Winston Company Limited [2014] KEHC 2530 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 2530 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
2530
Citation
[2014] KEHC 2530 (KLR)
Decided
7 October 2014
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil SuitPostureApplication for Interested PartyCoramP. NYAMWEYA
Holding

The court finds that the Applicant, Joseph Kimata Wachira, is a necessary party in the suit as he is the purchaser for value of the suit property and has brought evidence of a sale agreement and a caveat.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Wilson Waithaka Gitau, claims to have purchased the suit property from the Defendant, Kenya Winston Company Limited, through a sale agreement dated 26th May 2007. The Plaintiff alleges that he has paid a deposit and is entitled to develop the property. However, the Defendant prevented him from entering the property and the Plaintiff is seeking to be joined as an interested party in the suit.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant should be joined as an interested party to the suit
  2. Whether the Plaintiff has the right to develop the suit property

Reasoning

The court considers Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which gives the court discretion to add parties necessary for the court to adjudicate upon all questions involved in the suit. The court finds that the Applicant is a necessary party as he has purchased the property and has evidence of a sale agreement.

Outcome

The court orders that the Applicant, Joseph Kimata Wachira, be joined as an interested party in the suit.

Orders

  • Order to join the Applicant as an interested party in the suit

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Cases cited (1)
  • Werrot and Company Ltd and others v Andrew Douglas
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