Republic v Justus Wainaina Njuguna, City Council of Nairobi & Chief Lands Registrar Ex-Parte Eva Gaitha Miringu [2016] KEHC 7397 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI

JUDICIAL REVIEW DIVISION

JR CASE NO. 315 OF 2013

REPUBLIC…………………………………………...........……..APPLICANT

VERSUS

JUSTUS WAINAINA NJUGUNA…………………..……1ST RESPONDENT

CITY COUNCIL OF NAIROBI…………...........................2ND RESPONDENT

CHIEF LANDS REGISTRAR.............................................3RD RESPONDENT

EX-PARTE

EVA GAITHA MIRINGU

(Alias EVANGELINE MICERE GAITHA)

JUDGEMENT

1. Through the Notice of Motion application dated 2nd October, 2013, the ex parte Applicant, Eva Gaitha Miringu alias Evangeline Micere Gaitha prays for an order of mandamus compelling the 2nd Respondent to make payment of the sum of Kshs.301,136/= in satisfaction of the Certificate of Taxation issued in Nairobi ELC No. 1371 of 2007, Eva Gaitha Miringu (alias Evangeline Micere Gaitha) v Justus Wainaina Njuguna and 2 others.  The ex parte Applicant has named Justus Wainaina Njuguna, City Council of Nairobi and the Chief Lands Registrar as the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents respectively.

2. In brief, the ex parte Applicant’s case is that she successfully sued the respondents herein in Nairobi ELC No. 1371 of 2007for ownership and possession of all the property known as Jamhuri Phase II, Plot No. 93 currently known as Jamhuri Phase II, Plot 62/623.  She was also awarded costs of the suit.

3. Thereafter she filed party and party bill of costs against the 1st and 2nd respondents which was taxed at Kshs.301,136/= as per the Court’s ruling delivered on 27th June, 2012.  According to the ex parte Applicant, a Certificate of Taxation subsequently issued by the Deputy Registrar was forwarded to the 2nd Respondent.  However, the 2nd Respondent has failed to pay the amount indicated in the Certificate of Taxation thus necessitating these proceedings.

4. The application is not opposed by any of the respondents.

5. An order of mandamus is issued to compel the performance of a statutory duty owed to an applicant by a public officer or authority where the public officer or authority has, despite demand, refused to perform the duty-see Shah v Attorney General (No. 3) Kampala HCMC No. 31 of 1969, [1970] EA 543.

6. The ex parte Applicant herein has averred that she served the Certificate of Taxation upon the 2nd Respondent but there has been no payment.

7. The conditions for grant of an order of mandamus are thus satisfied.  An order of mandamus will therefore issue as prayed in the Notice of Motion dated 2nd October, 2013.  The ex parte Applicant will also have the costs of these proceedings from the 2nd Respondent.

Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi this 16th day of Feb., 2016

W. KORIR,

JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT