REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NYANDARUA
ELC NO E018 OF 2025
NANCY NJOKI MBURU............................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SOLOMON KIHARA.......................1ST DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
BENJAMIN KARURI......................2ND DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
STEPHEN MICHOFU NYORI...........3RD DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
RULING:
In the Application dated 2/3/2026, the Defendants pray for an order that they be granted leave to amend the Defence and Counter-claim dated 8/7/2025 in terms of an attached Draft Amended Defence and Counter-claim and that the Plaintiff be allowed to file a Reply to the Amended Defence and Defence to the Counter-claim.
The second substantive prayer is for an order to prohibit the Defendant from further sub-dividing, selling, transferring, changing, leasing or in any manner whatsoever dealing with all that parcel of land known as L.R No NYANDARUA/KAIMBAGA/903. He gives his reasons for the Application as that: -
a. The amendment is to add and clarify issues in controversy and to determine the real questions.
b. The Plaintiff has altered the character of the suit property in the middle of the case to defeat the prayers sought.
c. The proposed amendments are sought in good faith and would not prejudice the Plaintiff in a manner that cannot be compensated by costs.
d. It would be in the interest of justice to grant the prayers sought which this Court has jurisdiction to issue.
In the Affidavit in support and particularly paragraphs 5, the 3rd Defendant on behalf of himself and his co-Defendants depone that on 4/2/2026, the Plaintiff, while this matter was in Court, sub-divided the suit property known as L.R No. NYANDARUA/KAIMBAGA/903 into L.R Nos. 9511 and 9512. thereby materially altering the suit property with the intention of defeating the Counter-claim.
In the grounds of opposition dated 16/3/2026, the Plaintiff counters the Application by pleading that the same is non-started, inept and a gross abuse of the Court process, bad in law, unmeritorious, glossily incompetent and that there are no grounds adduced to warrant the orders sought. The same is an afterthought only aimed at delaying a fair trial of the suit.
Only the Defendants filed written submissions.
Leave for amendment can be granted at any time before Judgment. It would not prejudice the Plaintiff in any way and since the Defendants are confident that the character of the land has been altered since they filed their Defence and Counter-claim, I would not wish to have a scenario where they would be forced to file another suit to remedy the current situation which would certainly be rendered res judicata and I therefore grant the Defendants leave of 14 days to file and serve an amended Defence and amended Counter-claim. As to the second prayer, they seem to be asking for an order against themselves and I therefore ask them to reconsider the consequences of the granting of the same. costs in the cause.
Ruling read dated, signed and delivered at Nyandarua this 3rd Day of June, 2026.
MUGO KAMAU
JUDGE
In the Presence of: -
Court Assistant: Samson.
Plaintiff’s Counsel: Mr. Mwangangi.
Defendants’ Counsel: N/A.
| 2 |