'
1. The attention of this court has been drawn to the consent dated 14th October 2025 which reads;
‘a) The Plaintiff herein shall receive 1.0 acres out of NANDI/KAPKANGANI/514 as per the attached mediation settlement agreement and survey sketch map and working-out diagram.
b) The Plaintiff herein shall access and till the 1.0 acres out of NANDI/KAPKANGANI/514 with no objection from the Defendants and other family members
c) The Administrator of the Estate of Rashid Kipkurgat Too shall ensure the Plaintiff herein gets the title to her portion measuring 1.0 acres out of NANDI/KAPKANGANI/514, from the ongoing succession at the Khadi’s Court
d) The parties herein and the other family members shall live in peaceful co-existence hence forthwith.
e) Upon compliance with paragraph 1 and 3 above, ELC CASE NO. E011/2022 be and is hereby marked as settled with no orders as to costs.
2. Mr Moses Langat learned counsel for the plaintiff has informed the court that the consent is for the settlement of the instant matter. That therefore, the same be adopted as judgment herein.
3. So, the issues for determination are whether the consent be adopted as judgment in this suit.
4. The proposition by the plaintiff’s counsel was affirmed by Ms Chelimo learned counsel for the defendant.
5. It is noteworthy that the parties are at liberty to consent to terms of the settlement of the matter as held by the Supreme Court of Kenya in the case of Geoffrey Asanyo and 3 others-vs-Attorney General (2020) KESC 62 (KLR).
6. In the end, I find the duly signed consent between the parties valid and in consonant with Article 159 (2) (c) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010. I would to applaud both parties for the settlement of this matter through mediation.
7. A fortiori, judgment be and is hereby entered in terms of the consent dated 14th October 2025 as set out in paragraph 1 hereinabove.
8. It is so ordered.
DATED and DELIVERED at KAPSABET this 16th day of OCTOBER 2025.
G M A ONGONDO
JUDGE
PRESENT;
Mr Rotich learned counsel for the plaintiff
Ms Chelimo learned counsel for the defendant
Walter, court assistant
'
1. The attention of this court has been drawn to the consent dated 14th October 2025 which reads;
‘a) The Plaintiff herein shall receive 1.0 acres out of NANDI/KAPKANGANI/514 as per the attached mediation settlement agreement and survey sketch map and working-out diagram.
b) The Plaintiff herein shall access and till the 1.0 acres out of NANDI/KAPKANGANI/514 with no objection from the Defendants and other family members
c) The Administrator of the Estate of Rashid Kipkurgat Too shall ensure the Plaintiff herein gets the title to her portion measuring 1.0 acres out of NANDI/KAPKANGANI/514, from the ongoing succession at the Khadi’s Court
d) The parties herein and the other family members shall live in peaceful co-existence hence forthwith.
e) Upon compliance with paragraph 1 and 3 above, ELC CASE NO. E011/2022 be and is hereby marked as settled with no orders as to costs.
2. Mr Moses Langat learned counsel for the plaintiff has informed the court that the consent is for the settlement of the instant matter. That therefore, the same be adopted as judgment herein.
3. So, the issues for determination are whether the consent be adopted as judgment in this suit.
4. The proposition by the plaintiff’s counsel was affirmed by Ms Chelimo learned counsel for the defendant.
5. It is noteworthy that the parties are at liberty to consent to terms of the settlement of the matter as held by the Supreme Court of Kenya in the case of Geoffrey Asanyo and 3 others-vs-Attorney General (2020) KESC 62 (KLR).
6. In the end, I find the duly signed consent between the parties valid and in consonant with Article 159 (2) (c) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010. I would to applaud both parties for the settlement of this matter through mediation.
7. A fortiori, judgment be and is hereby entered in terms of the consent dated 14th October 2025 as set out in paragraph 1 hereinabove.
8. It is so ordered.
DATED and DELIVERED at KAPSABET this 16th day of OCTOBER 2025.
G M A ONGONDO
JUDGE
PRESENT;
Mr Rotich learned counsel for the plaintiff
Ms Chelimo learned counsel for the defendant
Walter, court assistant
'