NAIROBI, Kenya, Aug 17 – The proprietors of Gemini Properties Limited who were notified by Director Planning Compliance and Enforcement Nairobi County to provide approved plans of structures on LR No 209/9295, have complied with the notice from the County Government.
The company in the application filed in the High Court seeks confirmation from the director Planning and the County Government of its compliance to the notice dated 9 August 2018.
Gemini Properties lawyer Okongo Omogeni, states that upon recipient of the notice from the County Government to produce approved plans of the structure and occupational certificate on the suit property, the same were immediately forwarded to the office of Director Planning and Enforcement has demanded who has since not communicated to the applicant.
The said documents have been in possession of the applicant( Gemini Properties ) and were the subject matter of civil suit and consent order recorded before Justice Mohamed Warsame in 2011 giving effect that the defendants shall not interfere with the plaintiff’s quite possession of the suit property.
He says that this consent order has never been set aside or appealed against by the defendants and the application before the court dated 15 August 2018 is meant to validate the same.
” The applicants have forwarded their building approvals and change of usercertificate to the respondents but there has been no official communication from the defendants,” he contends.
Gemini Properties Limited is the registered owner of the suit property with lease hold tenure from the Government of Kenya for a term of 99 years commencing 1 January 1978, the lawyer notes.
Omogeni says that on November 2011 the City Council of Nairobi approved the applicant’s plan, registration No ET 622 for proposed commercial building and renewal to approved shops and offices, the defendants can not turn against its decision and ask what it had approved.
That lately on 24 July 2017 the County Government of Nairobi through its Urban Planing Department approved proposed amendment to the previous plan, saying there is no claim in the enforcement notice or any evidence that the approval for the development plans were acquired through fraudulent means or are forgeries.
The lawyer argue that its appalling as to how the director for planing and compliance reached on the blatant decision has contained in the enforcement notice, that the said structures in the suit property are illegally constructed without approval and that occupation and use of the piece of land is also illegal for want of an occupational certificate.
He says that the tenants who were served with enforcement notice are apprehensive of losing their business and property and issued notice to revoke tenancy agreements so entered when the defendants are fully aware tat documents relating to the suit land are in their possession.
When the matter case up before vacation judge, Justice John Mativo, did direct the applicant to serve the all defendants and the same be mentioned on 18 September 2018 after the High Court resumes from vacation.