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

Simon Emonger Enangei v Sumprose Okalo Madegwa [2014] KEHC 298 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 298 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
298
Citation
[2014] KEHC 298 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLand DisputePostureAppeal from a consent judgmentCoramHancox, Law, S.M. KIBUN
Holding

The Plaintiff's application is struck out as he has abandoned it. The consent judgment is not appealable as it was entered with the consent of the parties.

Facts

The Plaintiff and Defendant had competing claims over land parcels in North Teso/Kocholia. The Plaintiff sought to cancel titles to certain parcels registered in the Defendant's name, while the Defendant sought to dismiss the Plaintiff's case and restrain him from interfering with her land.

Issues

  1. Cancellation of titles
  2. Interference with land

Reasoning

The Plaintiff's application was abandoned, and the consent judgment entered on October 13, 2011, was not appealable due to the consent of the parties. The Defendant's claim was dismissed as the Plaintiff had not complied with the court's order.

Outcome

The Plaintiff's application is struck out, and the consent judgment is not appealable.

Orders

  • The Plaintiff's application is struck out.
  • The consent judgment is not appealable.

Remedies

  • The Plaintiff's application is struck out.
  • The consent judgment is not appealable.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Civil Procedure Rules
Cases cited (5)
  • Kahagi Ndirangu v Kenya Power and Lighting company Ltd
  • Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd v Specialized Engineering Co Ltd
  • Florence Wasike v Destimo Wamboko
  • Purcell v F.C. Tigal Ltd
  • Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd v Benjoh Amalgamated Ltd & Another
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case