JUSTICE ELIJAH OBAGA TO DELIVER RULING WHETHER A LAW FIRM SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED IN THE ONGOING LAND DISPUTE

JUSTICE ELIJAH OBAGA TO DELIVER RULING WHETHER A LAW FIRM SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED IN THE ONGOING LAND DISPUTE

By Chris Ojow

Through a notice of motion the seven plaintiffs through their lead Senior Counsel Paul Muite submitted an application, seeking for the removal of Ogolla Okelo & Co. LLP Advocates from representing.

The seven respondents /applicants in their applications gave several grounds, why they want the law firm be barred.

Senior counsel Paul Muite in his lengthy submission before Justice Elijah Obaga highlighted several reasons in authored letters, urging the Court to disqualify the said law firm and issue a summon for them to testify on the ongoing property dispute acquisition.

Muite further allegedly stressed that the firm were involved in the alleged illegal acquisition of the disputed property at the center of ownership.

The seven plaintiffs are Angela Musimba the wife of Kibwezi Member of Parliament, Stephen Githinji Kamau, Charles Njuguna Mukiri, Evans Kipkemoi Sigilai, Serving High Court of Kenya Judge Joel Ngugi who’s elevation to Court of Appeal has generated heated debate in the Country, with the spy Agency forwarding his name to the President alleging that he’s among the tainted Judges in the Country, Sylvia Kangara and John Wachira Wangombe.

The seven respondents sued by the defendants over land in their application accuses the said law firm of conflict of interest and in the interest of Justice the firm ought to disqualify themselves from the land matter .

The respondents filed an application before Judge Elijah Obaga seeking an Officers of the Court representing the other parties the defendants, who claims ownership of the land in dispute and wants to develop it, to excuse themselves from the ongoing matter.

The applicants further submitted that the law firm is engaged themselves in the alleged purchase of the property in dispute be summoned to shed more light on ownership.

A move described by the developer the eighth defendant Guangzhou Villa as time buying tactics by plaintiffs claiming ownership and home owners.

The defendants In their brief response through their Officer of the Court, described the Senior Counsel Paul Muite submission as after thought and should be dismissed by the Court.

The law firm Ogolla Okelo & Co. LLP Advocates accused the applicants of memory lapse in confusing the Company that was involved in purchase process .

They also urged the court to dismiss the application since the applicants has not proved or provided the court with materials to warrant for the removal of the said law firm.

As the eighth defendant developer Guangzhou Villa cried foul, that the earlier order issued preventing there company from developing the disputed land was not issued procedurally .

Guangzhou alleged that the stopping orders were issued in the absence of other parties contrary to the laid down procedure.

And instead of moving on with the hearing of the matter, other parties filed application seeking the removal of an Officer of the Court in the matter.

A move the developer Guangzhou Villa protested against and termed it as purely time buying and a scheme to stop them from developing their alleged legal property.

Justice Elijah will deliver a ruling on Thursday 14th November 2019 at 2pm East Africa Time.

The defendants are Fred Rabong’o, Mary Akatch, Daniel Ochieng Ogola, Impulse Holding Limited, Muthangari Gardens Management Limited, Dayax Investment Limited, Nairobi County Government, and Guangzhou Villa Limited.