1.This is a ruling in respect of a preliminary objection by the second Defendant on the ground that this suit is subjudice. The 2nd Defendant contends that there is another suit before the Chief magistrate’s court Eldoret being CM E& L E001 of 2022 (Sarah Aregae Lopeyok –Vs- Jacob k. Kiplagat and Salome Ewoi) over the same subject matter.
2.The 2nd Defendant therefore contends that this suit is an abuse of the process of the court as it offends the principle of sub-judice. The parties herein were directed to file written submissions on the preliminary objection. The 2nd Defendant filed her submissions on 9th March, 2022. The Plaintiffs filed their submissions on 15th February, 2022.
3.I have gone through the submissions by the parties and the only issue for determination is whether this suit is sub-judice. The principle of sub-judice is predicated on section 6 of Civil procedure Act which states as follows:-
4.There is no contention that Eldoret CMC E&L E001 of 2022 is the one which was filed earlier than the present case. The dispute in both suits revolve around Uasin Gishu/Kuinet Settlement Scheme/84 (suit property). Save for the 1st, 3rd and 4th Defendants, the rest of the parties herein are also parties in CMC E001 of 2022.
5.In CMC E&L E001 of 2022, the Plaintiff is seeking to have the Plaintiffs in this case who are Defendants in that case evicted from the suit property. In the present suit, the Plaintiffs who are Defendants in CMC E &L E001 of 2022 are seeking to have the title held by the 2nd Defendant who is the Plaintiff in CMC E & L E001 of 2022 cancelled on the ground that they had purchased 4 acres and 2 acres respectively from the 1st Defendant who later on fraudulently transferred title to the 2nd Defendant.
6.In Republic –Vs- Registrar of societies –Kenya & 2 others Ex-parte Moses Kirima & 2 others (2017) eKLR, held as follows: -
7.In the case of Kenya National Commission on Human Rights -vs- Attorney General; Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission & 16 others (interested parties) (2020) eKLR, the Supreme Court of Kenya stated as follows:-
8.In Kampala High Court Civil suit No. 450 of 1993 Nyanza Garage –Vs- Attorney General the Court stated as follows:-
9.The subject matter in both suits is the same. The addition of the 1st, 3rd and 4th Defendants in the present suit does not alter the substance of the case. The Chief magistrate’s court is competent to grant the relief which the Plaintiffs in this suit are claiming. What they only need to do is to introduce a counter-claim where they will seek the relief which they are seeking herein.
10.It has been submitted that the earlier suit has been stayed pending the directions of this court. The stay in that suit may have been made at the instance of the Plaintiffs herein but that does not give this court leeway to deal with this. Parties are better advised not to file a multiplicity of suits as this ends up clogging the courts with unnecessary suits which ought to be handled in one suit. I find that the present suit is sub-judice. I order that the suit be stayed pending the hearing and determination of Eldoret CMC E&L E001 of 2022. The Plaintiffs shall pay the costs of this application to the 2nd defendant.
It is so ordered.