Skip to content
JudgmentNORMAN GATHAKARI IKAHU VS ELIJAH DICK IKAHU2 min read

NORMAN GATHAKARI IKAHU VS ELIJAH DICK IKAHU

Environment and Land Court at Nyeri Environment and Land Court · · MUGO KAMAU, J


R U L I N G

  1. In his Application dated 7.8.2024 the Defendant seeks the removal of restriction over the Parcel of Land known as SAGANA TOWNSHIP/388/234.  This came alongside the Application that the firm of Okun & Company Advocates be granted leave to come on record for the Defendant post-judgment.
  2. Judgment was entered on 9.9.1983 in favour of the Plaintiff for the sum of Kshs.65,000= which amount of money was paid to the Plaintiff’s Advocates vide Bank Cheque No.256794 for Kshs.55,000= and cash of Kshs.10,000=  on 17.9.1984 and 12.3.1988 respectively as evidenced in the copy of cheque and receipt paid to Wanjao & Wanjao Advocates.
  3. To begin with, the firm of Okun & Company Advocates is hereby granted leave to come on record for the Defendant.
  4. The Plaintiff/Decree Holder subsequently wrote to the Land Registrar, Kerugoya on 6.12.1994 asking the said Registrar to remove the Restriction that had been placed against the suit land. 
  5. According to the order made by this court on 9.9.1983, the court held that the sum of Kshs.60,000= in full settlement inclusive of costs and interests to be paid within 12 months from the said  date of the order failure to which it was to attract interest at the rate of 12% per annum and may be this explaining why the Defendant paid Kshs.5,100= over and above the decretal amount though the Decree dated 10.7.1984 showed the total Decretal amount to be Kshs.69,000.
  6. The Decretal amount having been paid in full and final settlement though belatedly and the Plaintiff having acknowledged the same, there is no outstanding claim by the Plaintiff against the Defendant.
  7. Payment was made after several Notices to show cause.  The restriction over the aforesaid Parcel of Land was placed on the same date the order of the court was made ie. On 9.9.1983 in the following terms –

“further Agreement by counsel is that the Defendant will not be entitled to sell the plot and the improvements thereon or to dispose them off in any manner until the Judgment Debt herein is fully satisfied…”

  1. The Judgment Debt having been satisfied and with the acknowledgement of the Decree Holder the Restriction order is now unnecessary and this court orders that the same be lifted.  These are the orders of the court.

Dated, Signed and Delivered at Nyeri this 25th day of July, 2025.

MUGO KAMAU

JUDGE

MUGO KAMAU

JUDGE


    NORMAN GATHAKARI IKAHU VS ELIJAH DICK IKAHU NORMAN GATHAKARI IKAHU VS ELIJAH DICK IKAHU