[2020] KEELC 2623 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 2623 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff had proved on a balance of probabilities that he is the bona fide and registered owner of L.R. No. 9917/4, having purchased and registered the property in 1989. The Plaintiff's title was supported by documentary evidence, including a Certificate of Title and Transfer documents....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 2623 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Charles Steven Mbindyo; Defendant: Justus Wainaina Njuguna; Defendant: Chief Land Registrar; Defendant: Hon. Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 460 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's suit allowed. Declaratory and injunctive relief granted. Costs awarded to Plaintiff.
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Ownership Disputes, Fraudulent Transfer, Title Registration, Injunctive Relief
Source Language
en
Land and Property Ownership Disputes Fraudulent Transfer Title Registration Injunctive Relief

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Steven Mbindyo

Plaintiff

Justus Wainaina Njuguna

Defendant

Chief Land Registrar

Defendant

Hon. Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff is the bona fide and registered owner of L.R. No. 9917/4.
  2. 2 Whether the 1st Defendant fraudulently attempted to sub-divide and dispose of the suit property.
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction and declaratory relief against the Defendants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff had proved on a balance of probabilities that he is the bona fide and registered owner of L.R. No. 9917/4, having purchased and registered the property in 1989. The Plaintiff's title was supported by documentary evidence, including a Certificate of Title and Transfer documents. There was no evidence from the Defendants to challenge the Plaintiff's ownership or to prove fraud or misrepresentation. The court applied Section 23(1) of the Registration of Titles Act (repealed), which provides that a certificate of title is conclusive evidence of ownership, subject only to proven fraud or misrepresentation. The Plaintiff was therefore entitled to declaratory...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's suit allowed. Declaratory and injunctive relief granted. Costs awarded to Plaintiff.

Orders

  • A declaration is issued that the 1st Defendant's conduct in seizing, repossessing, and attempting to sell or sub-divide L.R. No. 9917/4 is unlawful, wrongful, and arbitrary.
  • A declaration is issued that the Plaintiff is the bona fide and registered owner of L.R. No. 9917/4 and entitled to uninterrupted use and occupation.