John Kavosa Iliona & 135 Others V Commissioner of Lands & Another [2012] KEHC 1821 (KLR)
Full Case Text
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
PETITION NO. 164 OF 2012
JOHN KAVOSA ILIONA
JAMES SINGU OGUTU
PETER ANDAI LINGALINGA
ONESMUS PHANUEL AMAKHALE
ERUSTUS ANDAI AMBUNDO
PETER MUKABI MATAKWA
ALFRED OMUKHOBERO AKWANYI
MIKE POUS ANDAYI
HOSBORN AMBIYA OGUTU
WILLIAM MUHURA GITAU
AMBROSE NICHOLAS AWIDH
GILBERT NJUKI GAUMU
HARUN KIMEU MWAU
SAMUEL NG’ANG’A GITAU
ANCENT KITUVA KITETU
BARACK MICHAIAH OYWAYA
PETER MUTUKI NTHUKU
NZENGYA MUTHOKA
JULIUS NGALA OPATI
CHARLES PERTER MAINA
ROBERT OBED ATSULU
WILLIAM OTIENO OLUOCH
JOSEPH OTIU WACHARA
RICHARD MWANZIA MUSIKALI
DAVID OTWOMA MBATI
HESBORN KHABALA LWANGU
MUTHUKI KARIMI
ERICK ODIGA
SAMSON OKETCH WMARI
BEATRICE NGARIZU INGIMBA
JOHN ALFRED ODUOR
FRANCIS WANJAU GITHAIGA
FRANCIS ADISA AGUTA
CONSOLATA ADHIAMBO JUMA
FRANCIS OMOMU NYANGURE
SARAH AYEKHA IMBUYE
LUKA OKANDI AMULI
ALEX OUMA NYASITA
LEONARD MAINA MWANGI
SELINA WANJIRU NJENGE
NICHOLAS MUTUGU NGURE
RUTH MIDEVA MUHADI
BEATRICE OMBINA OLUOCH
APPOLO ADRIANS DIANGA
TABITHA ANDESO
ALICE ENEYIA KHARUNDA
SEPHIRAN KIBIDI
DANIEL VITONYE ILLIONA
EDMUND MUOKI MWANGANGI
JAMES MURIITHI NGUNG’U
MARY ATIENO ANDAI
MARTIN MURIU GITONGA
PETER OMONDI CHWERO
RUTH MUTSAMI
JAMES MEJA MWANGI
MARY ANDIKA
KEFA O. ONYURO
ATENAS TETE ONDORI
ESTHER WAMBUI
BENSON MUTEMI KATHOKA
IBRAHIM, AURA ATITI
ANDREW KHAYO OGUTU
LORNA ONZELE
MARIAMU NDAKA;A
LILIAN AMBIYO
SIMON KIHUMBA KAMOR
CHARITY MBUCU NYAGA
ARTHUR M O OBAKHA
ALICE MMBONE
WILSON CHRISTOPHER NG’AMBWA
ALICE NJERI MAINA
JOSEPH MUCHINA CHEGE
JUDITH ASSSENDI AKALICHE
TERESA NYAMBURA NJAMB
DAVID MUTURI MWANGI
ZACCHAEUS KAMBERE
NANCY WANJIKU NJENGA
BEATRICE OYIELE AMBUKA
JERIDAH AMBOKA
CLEOPHAS WAEMA MWANANGI
ENOCK ANDALE
TOM OBULIFWA ETEJELA
AGGREY LUKWENDE OCHIENG
EBRAHIM NGAIRA MUCHERA
DANIEL KATHURIMA KATHOKA
MIRIAM IMIRI TETE
STEPHEN MWAURA KARITA
FRANCIS LAVUNA AMBUZI
ANJELINE AKOTH OCHIENG
GLADYS MUHONJA
DANIEL KIPRONO ARITEI
JOSHUA KEGODE SHIKOTE
EMILY AMOLO WASWA
RICHARD EDWARD TOSTSI
LINET B ACHAYO
ELIZABETH HOKA
RICHARD ODHIAMBO OBONDI
STEPHEN AUCHI
JOHN MUZIOMBO
PETER MBONE ODERA
SOLOMON MWANGI
MOSES OKONDA TETE
PHANUEL OTIENO OTIENDE
PENINA NAOMI ODIYO
JAMES AYOTI WABONDA
JOSEPHINE AYIEKO ANDAYI
ERIC OTIENO ADUDA
ELIZABETH WANJIRU MWANGI
PETER MUTURI GACUGU
GIDEON MUTIEMULI
PHILIP ASIKOYE MUKHOBI
FLORAH ACHANDO
CATHERINE WANJIRU NJERI
ANTHONY KUNGU KARANJA
ZEPHANIAH MWANGI GITAHI
PETER KANYAGIA KARIUKI
ZEDEKIAH MELCHZEDEK ANUNA
COSMAS NDINYA ATSULO
COSMOS GABRIEL ANYANGO
MOSES NDINYA ATSULO
DINAH AYAKO COSMOAS
LONIC JABUYA
MILTON SHIKOLIKI NGOMARA
DORCAS ANDAYI
AGNES WAMBUI MUGO
ELISHAMO OKENO OMUHEL
SAMSON OSAMBO
JOHN KITUZI MAKAU
MARGARET A HORE
JAMES NJOROGE GICHUKI
MARGARET W KARUNGU
MUTOFUNDI KATHENYA
JOHN NJOROGE KARANJA
GEOFFREY AMANYA
PETER MBURU MWANGI ………..………..……………. PETITIONERS
AND
COMMISSIONER OF LANDS ……..………….……... 1ST RESPONDENT
THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL………………….2ND RESPONDENT
AND
AVITON ENTERPRISES LTD ……….……..... 1ST INTERESTED PARTY
THE TOWN CLERK,
CITY COUNCIL OF NAIROBI …………..….. 2ND INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
Petitioners’ Case
1. By way of Petition dated 18th April, 2012, the petitioners moved this court seeking the following reliefs:
a)A declaration that the Respondents’ conduct and action amount to denial, violation, infringement and/or threat to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the Petitioner as provided under Articles 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28, 29, 31, 39, 40, 43, 47, 48, 50 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010;
b)An award of Kshs 3 billion being damages;
c)A declaration that the Petitioners have a constitutional right to be allocated L.R Number NAIROBI BLOCK 83/530
d)Costs of the Petition;
e)Any other or further orders, writs and directions the Honourable court considers appropriate and just to grant for the purpose of the enforcement of the Petitioner’s fundamental rights and freedoms.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the City Council, the 2nd interested party of allegedly demolishing their houses on L.R Number NAIROBI/BLOCK 83/530(“the suit property”) and the 1st interested party’s action in taking possession of the suit property.
3. The petitioners complain that they had established themselves in the suit property for over 20 years wherein they constructed their houses and settled with their families, all this with full knowledge of the Interested Parties.
4. It is the petitioners’ contention that their rights under the Constitution have been infringed and they seek a declaration that they have a constitutional right to be allocated the property. They further contend that the interested parties’ actions of violently evicting them from the suit premises thereby rendering them destitute subjected them to inhuman and degrading treatment. They further contend that due to the respondents’ actions, their right to housing has been infringed and that the allocation to the 1st interested party was done in an illegal and discriminatory manner.
5. In their affidavit in support of the petition sworn by John Kavosa Iliona,the 1st petitioner, the petitioners’ case is that their possession of the land has been uninterrupted since they occupied the same. That their mabati houses were demolished under the guise of failure to comply with the Physical Planning Act.
6. They further allege that the suit property was list in the Ndung’u Report as one of the properties that were unlawfully and wrongfully acquired by the interested party and that there was no justification by the respondents to dispose of the same illegally. As a result they claim that the interested party has no valid title to the premises and since it did not acquire the property for value and that they will not suffer any prejudice should this court issue an order of injunction.
Interested Party’s Case
7. The 1st interested party has opposed the petition through the replying affidavit sworn by Habib Omar Kongo, its Chief Executive Officer, on 27th July, 2012, on the basis that it is the registered proprietor of the suit property. It also avers that this suit is not only res judicata but also an abuse of the court process in view of other suit filed over the suit property in other courts.
The Application
8. The plea of res judicata is also raised in the 1st interested party’s Notice of Motion dated 27th July, 2012. Its position is that the applicants have been filed against various suits against the respondents and interested parties as follows;
(1)Nairobi HCCC No. 48 of 2006, John Kavoja Illiona v. Aviton Enterprises Limited.The plaintiffs sought, “A declaration that the applicants are entitled to LR No. NAIROBI/BLOCK 83/530 by way of adverse possession.” The case was heard by Hon. Justice K H Rawal and on 9th October 2007, the suit was struck out.
(2)Nairobi HC Misc. No. 621 of 2008(OS), John Kavosa Iliona and 135 others v City Council of Nairobi and Others.In this case the applicants invoked the provisions of sections 74, 75, 77, 82 and 84 of the former Constitution claiming proprietary rights and adverse possession. The suit was heard by Hon. Justice D. K. Maraga and dismissed on 30th November 2010.
(3)Apart from the aforesaid suits, the petitioners have also filed other suits against the 1st interested party in respect of the property. These are;
(a)Nairobi CMCC No. 7420 of 2002, Umoja Unjuzi Self Help Group v Habib Omar Kongo.The suit was withdrawn.
(b)Nairobi HCCC No. 326 of 2005, Umoja II Ujuzi Youth Self Help Group v Nairobi Children’s Care and Rehabilitation Centre and Habib Omar Kongo. The suit was withdrawn.
(c)Nairobi CMCC No. 2388 of 2011, John Kavosa Iliona and Others v Amiton Enterprises Limited and Habib Omar Kongo.
9. The applicants’ case is that the present suit being a suit against the same parties and in respect of the same property is res judicata. Mr Thuita, counsel for the applicant, urged the court to strike out the petition.
10. In their replying affidavit to the application, sworn by John Kavosa Iliona on 9th October, 2012, the petitioners position is that matters of the Civil Procedure Act (Chapter 21 of the Laws of Kenya) should not be imported into matters of enforcement of fundamental rights and. Mr Kiplagat, counsel for the petitioners, argued that the matter is one for enforcement of fundamental rights and freedoms and the court should exercise great circumspection in striking out the suit.
Determination
11. It is not disputed that the present case involves the same parties and in respect of the same property. The fact that it involves enforcement of fundamental rights and freedoms does not negate the application for the doctrine of res-judicata. Whether the doctrine of res-judicata applies to matter of enforcement of fundamental rights has been settled in several cases. (See Edwin Thuo v Attorney General & Another Nairobi Petition No. 212 of 2011 (Unreported), Richard Nduati Kariuki v Leonard Nduati Kariuki & Another Nairobi Misc Civil Appl. No. 7 of 2006 (Unreported), Booth Irrigation v Mombasa Water Products Ltd (Booth Irrigation No. 1), Nairobi HC Misc. Appl. No. 1052 of 2004 (Unreported).
12. In any event, the judgment of Hon. Justice Maraga dated the 30th November, 2010 in Nairobi HCCC No. 621 of 2008dealt conclusively with the petitioners’ claim including the issue of adverse possession and in that case the provisions of the former Constitution were invoked.
13. I find that this suit is res-judicata and an abuse of the court process and it is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
DATEDand DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 18th day of October 2012.
D.S. MAJANJA
JUDGE
Mr Kiplagat instructed by Kwengu & Company Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr Thuita instructed by Mwangi & Guandaru Advocates for the interested party/applicant.