[2019] KEELC 4289 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence that a government caveat was registered against LR NO.27/114. The only evidence presented was a letter from the National Land Commission, which is not proof of registration of a caveat. The court emphasized that an official search or the actual...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 4289 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Beige Investments Limited; Defendant: Chief Land Registrar; Defendant: Registrar of Government Lands; Defendant: National Land Commission
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 224 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Originating Summons / Judgment
- Outcome
- suit dismissed
- Judges
- AK Bor
- Legal Topics
- Caveats on Land, Removal of Caveat, Land Registration, Government Land, Title Search
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Beige Investments Limited
Plaintiff
Chief Land Registrar
Defendant
Registrar of Government Lands
Defendant
National Land Commission
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is sufficient evidence of a government caveat registered against LR NO.27/114.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to orders for removal of the caveat in the absence of evidence of its registration.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence that a government caveat was registered against LR NO.27/114. The only evidence presented was a letter from the National Land Commission, which is not proof of registration of a caveat. The court emphasized that an official search or the actual caveat document is required to establish the existence and particulars of a caveat. Since the postal search only showed a mortgage and not a caveat, the Plaintiff did not meet the evidentiary threshold required for the orders sought. Consequently, the suit was dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for lack of merit.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NAIROBI
ELC SUIT NO.224 OF 2016(O.S)
BEIGE INVESTMENTS LIMITED............................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
CHIEF LAND REGISTRAR.............................................1ST DEFENDANT
REGISTRAR OF GOVERNMENT LANDS...................2ND DEFENDANT
NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION................................3RD DEFENDANT
JUDGEMENT
The Plaintiff commenced this suit by way of the Originating Summons dated 2nd March 2016, seeking orders for the removal of the caveat lodged on L.R No. 27/114 (“the Suit Property”) and costs. The suit is based on grounds that there is presently a government caveat registered against the Suit Property placed by the Land Registrar, without giving notice to the Plaintiff.
The application was supported by the Affidavit of one Simon Kagwanja Thuo, a director of the Plaintiff who deponed that the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the Suit Property, which it purchased through a loan facility advanced by Equity Bank Limited.
He further deponed that he recently learnt from the Lands Office that there was a government caveat registered against the Suit Property. He deponed that Plaintiff’s counsel wrote to the Ministry of Lands requesting to have the caveat removed. The National Lands Commission responded to the Plaintiff’s counsel on 19/1/2016 admitting that the Registrar of Government Lands placed a caveat on the Suit Property. He annexed a copy of the letter.
The 1st and 2nd Defendants did not enter appearance. The 3rd Defendant entered appearance and appeared in court to seek more time to file its response but failed to do so within the timelines given by the court.
The court has considered the Originating Summons, the Affidavit in support together with the Plaintiff’s written submissions.
This being a suit seeking to lift a caveat, the Plaintiff was expected to place before the court a copy of the caveat complained of, or a certificate of official search conducted on the title of the suit from which the court would have ascertained that indeed the caveat does exist, the date it was lodged and the grounds upon which it was lodged in accordance with Section 116 of the repealed Government Lands Act. There is no evidence that a caveat was registered against the property known as LR NO.27/114. The postal search only shows that a mortgage is registered against this parcel of land.
The letter dated 19/1/2016 confirming the existence of a caveat on the Suit Property is not evidence of a caveat registered against the land. Interest in land must be registered against the title and this is what would be shown on a search done on the land. The suit in its current form is devoid of merit, it is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 26th day of February 2019.
K. BOR
JUDGE
In the presence of: -
Ms. C. Serem holding brief for Mr. Mungai for the Plaintiff
Mr. V. Owuor- Court Assistant
No appearance for the Defendant