Timothy Ingosi & 87 others v Kenya Forest Services, Attorney General & Commissioner of Lands [2018] KEELC 1050 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET

E & L CASE NO. 479 OF 2012

TIMOTHY INGOSI & 87 OTHERS.....................................PLAINTIFFS

VERSUS

KENYA FOREST SERVICES.......................................1ST DEFENDANT

HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL....................................2ND DEFENDANT

COMMISSIONER OF LANDS....................................3RD DEFENDANT

RULING

The plaintiffs have come to court for an order that the court extends the period of suspension of the judgment for a further five years to enable the government consider the plight of the defendants.  The application is based on grounds that the Honourable court delivered its judgment on 8th January, 2016 wherein it dismissed the plaintiff’s case but the judgment was suspended for a period of two years to enable the government consider the plight of the defendants and the counterclaim of the 1st defendant succeeded.

The plaintiffs have engaged the government with a view of getting a resettlement plan and de-gazettement of the suit land to pave way for settlement of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are in occupation and use of the suit land. The two years suspension of the judgment is about to expire which will lead to the plaintiffs being evicted from the suit land and this will render the negotiations engaged in with the government nugatory. That the Honourable court has jurisdiction to grant the orders sought. It is just, fair and expedient that the application be allowed.

In the supporting affidavit, Timothy Ingosi states that the Honourable court delivered its judgment on 8th January, 2016 wherein it dismissed the plaintiffs’ case and the 1st defendant’s counterclaim succeeded but was suspended for a period of two years to enable the government consider the plight of the defendant. That the two years period granted by court is about to expire which lead to the plaintiffs being evicted from the suit and their property being demolished.

That the plaintiffs with the assistance of the County Government of Kakamega engaged the government with a view of getting a resettlement plan and de-gazettement of the suit land to pave way for settlement of the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs are in occupation and use of the suit land and it is necessary that the period be extended so as not to render the negotiations entered into nugatory. That the Honourable court has jurisdiction to grant the orders sought.

That it is just, fair and expedient that the application be allowed as should the plaintiffs be evicted they will suffer irreparable loss and damage and they will be rendered landless.

The 1st defendant states that so far, there s no meaningful engagement between the plaintiffs and the defendants since judgment was delivered 2 years ago.  It is stated that the plaintiffs have neither indulged the 1st defendant, The Ministry of Lands nor the Attorney General for any resettlement programmes.

I have considered the application before court dated 24. 7.2017 and the replying affidavit of the 1st defendant.  I made a site visit on of the disputed parcel of land and observed that there are people still living in the forest area, a police station, a national youth service camp. I have seen a letter dated 21. 2.2018 by Hon. Alfred O. Matiang’i, County Executive Committee Member for Lands, Housing Urban areas and Physical Planning, Kakamega County confirming that there are negotiations ongoing with the Forest Department.  I am convinced that the parties herein require more time for negotiations. I do hereby extend the period for suspension of the judgment for 2 years from the date of this ruling.  Orders accordingly.

Dated and delivered at Eldoret this 23rd day of October, 2018.

A.  OMBWAYO

JUDGE