[2014] KEHC 2362 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff, as the registered proprietor of the suit land, had established his ownership by producing a valid title deed. The defendant failed to appear or contest the claim, and her name did not appear in any ownership records. The plaintiff's efforts to resolve the dispute locally were...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 2362 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Benard Ojwang Ouma; Defendant: Alice Owuyo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 95 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Environment Case / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment entered for the plaintiff as prayed in prayers (d) and (e) of the plaint.
- Legal Topics
- Land Ownership, Eviction, Adverse Possession, Title Deeds
- 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
Benard Ojwang Ouma
Plaintiff
Alice Owuyo
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Environment Case / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is the lawful owner of parcel No. CENTRAL ALEGO/KOMOLO/483.
- 2 Whether the defendant unlawfully encroached and settled on the plaintiff's land.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an order of eviction against the defendant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff, as the registered proprietor of the suit land, had established his ownership by producing a valid title deed. The defendant failed to appear or contest the claim, and her name did not appear in any ownership records. The plaintiff's efforts to resolve the dispute locally were unsuccessful. As the matter was uncontroverted and the evidence supported the plaintiff's claim, the court granted the orders sought for eviction and costs.
Court Disposition
Judgment entered for the plaintiff as prayed in prayers (d) and (e) of the plaint.
Orders
- The defendant is ordered to vacate and be evicted from parcel No. CENTRAL ALEGO/KOMOLO/483.
- The plaintiff is awarded costs of the suit and interest.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU
LAND AND ENVIRONMENT NO.95 OF 2013
BENARD OJWANG AUMA........................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ALICE OWUYO.........................................................................DEFENDANT
FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff – BENARD OJWANG OUMA – filed this suit here against the defendant on 26/4/13. The matter was filed vide a plaint dated 22/4/2013 and is against the defendant – ALICE OWUYO. The suit concerns suit parcel No. CENTRAL ALEGO/KOMOLO/483, which the plaintiff owns together with two others – GEORGE ONYANGO AUMA and ALFRED OTIENO AUMA.
The suit parcel is said to have originally belonged to the plaintiff's father –AUMA OJWANGand borders land parcel No. CENTRAL ALEGO/KOMOLO/993, which the defendant's husband originally owned but sold.
The defendant is said to have encroached on the plaintiff's land and settled on it. This happened in the year 2011. The plaintiff now wants an order of eviction plus costs of the suit and interests.
Court records show that the defendant was served on 3/5/2013. Despite service however, she didn't enter appearance and/or file defence within the requisite period. Subsequently, judgment was requested for and the same was entered against the defendant on 3/6/2013.
The matter came for formal proof on 11/3/2014. The plaintiff reiterated much that is contained in the plaint. In addition, it became clear that the plaintiff has tried to handle the matter at the local level (before the area chief) but his efforts were not successful. It also came to light that the plaintiff is the administrator of his late father's estate.
This is an uncontroverted matter. On balance the plaintiff has shown that the land parcel herein belongs to him and his two brothers. The defendants name does not appear anywhere in the records of ownership. A copy of title deed was availed.
There is really nothing standing in the way of the plaintiffs claim. Accordingly, the plaintiff is granted prayers (d) and (e) in his plaint which are also stated at paragraph 3 of this judgment.
A.K. KANIARU – JUDGE
7/10/2014