[2023] KEELC 19891 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent was unwilling to sign the necessary conveyancing documents to effect the subdivision and registration of the suit property as previously decreed. The respondent's explanations regarding the lost title and alleged hostility were inconsistent and unconvincing. The court held that,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 19891 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Peter Chepkonga; Defendant: Helena Targok Kuikui; Defendant: Amos Tuitoek; Defendant: Henry Tuitoek; Defendant: Helena Targok Kuikui (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of the Late Kuikui Chepkonga – Deceased)
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 173 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion / Ruling on Post Judgment Execution Application
- Outcome
- Application allowed; orders granted as prayed in prayers (2), (3), (4), and (5).
- Judges
- EO Obaga
- Legal Topics
- Execution of Decree, Subdivision of Land, Registration of Title, Conveyancing Documents, Court Orders Enforcement
- 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
Peter Chepkonga
Plaintiff
Helena Targok Kuikui
Defendant
Amos Tuitoek
Defendant
Henry Tuitoek
Defendant
Helena Targok Kuikui (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of the Late Kuikui Chepkonga – Deceased)
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Post Judgment Execution Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the Deputy Registrar execute conveyancing documents to facilitate execution of the court's decree.
- 2 Whether the Land Registrar should dispense with the production of the original title deed for purposes of subdivision and registration.
- 3 Whether police security should be provided to the County Surveyor during the subdivision exercise.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent was unwilling to sign the necessary conveyancing documents to effect the subdivision and registration of the suit property as previously decreed. The respondent's explanations regarding the lost title and alleged hostility were inconsistent and unconvincing. The court held that, to give effect to its earlier judgment and prevent further obstruction, it was necessary to authorize the Deputy Registrar to execute all requisite documents on behalf of the respondent, direct the Land Registrar to dispense with the original title deed, and order police security for the survey exercise. The application was therefore allowed as prayed in the relevant orders.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; orders granted as prayed in prayers (2), (3), (4), and (5).
Orders
- The Deputy Registrar is authorized to execute all necessary documents to facilitate execution of the court's decree issued on July 29, 2022 with respect to parcel number Baringo/Kapropita/19.
- The Land Registrar Baringo County is directed to dispense with the production of the original title deed for purposes of effecting the subdivision and registration/transfer in compliance with the decree.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
Chepkonga v Kuikui & 3 others (Environment & Land Case 173 of 2016) [2023] KEELC 19891 (KLR) (21 September 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 19891 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Environment & Land Case 173 of 2016
EO Obaga, J
September 21, 2023
Between
Peter Chepkonga
Plaintiff
and
Helena Targok Kuikui
1st Defendant
Amos Tuitoek
2nd Defendant
Henry Tuitoek
3rd Defendant
Helena Targok Kuikui (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of the Late Kuikui Chepkonga – Deceased)
4th Defendant
Ruling
1. This is a ruling of a notice of motion dated 8/5/2023 in which the 1st Defendant/Applicant seeks the following orders: -1. Spent2. That this honourable court be pleased to authorise the Deputy Registrar of this honourable court to execute all the necessary documents to facilitate the execution of this honourable court’s decree issued on July 29, 2022 with respect to parcel number Baringo/Kapropita/19. 3.That the Land Registrar Baringo County be and is hereby directed to dispense with the production of the original title deed with respect to parcel number Baringo/Kapropita/19 for purposes of effecting the subdivision and registration/transfer in compliance with the decree issued on July 29, 2022. 4.That the OCS Kabarnet Police Station do provide security to the County Surveyor during the picking of the coordinates.5. That costs for this application be provided.
2. The plaintiff /Respondent had filed a suit against the Applicant and her family in which he sought to have them evicted from LR No Baringo/Kapropita/19 (suit property). The Applicant filed a defence and raised a counter claim in which she among others sought a declaration that he Respondent was holding half of the suit property on behalf of the Estate of Kuikui Chepkonga.
3. In a judgment delivered on 27/7/2022, the Respondent’s suit was dismissed with costs and the Applicants counter-claim succeeded. The court directed that the Baringo County Land Registrar and surveyor do ensure that the suit property is subdivided into two equal shares thereof.
4. The Respondent filed an application for stay pending appeal but that application was dismissed in a ruling delivered on 2/2/2023. The Applicant extracted a decree and served it upon the County Surveyor who went to the ground to implement the court order as per the decree. After the County Surveyor had done a substantial work, the Respondent’s son disrupted the exercise.
5. The Applicant now contends that the Respondent has refused to surrender the original title and sign other conveyancing documents to enable a smooth registration of the respective portions of the Applicant and the Respondent.
6. The Respondent opposed the Applicant’s application based on a replying affidavit sworn on 25/5/2023. The Respondent contends that the Applicant’s application is premature and that there is no evidence that he has been asked to sign conveyancing documents and that he has refused.
7. The Respondent states that the original title got lost and that he has not procured a replacement. He states that he had been willing to sign conveyancing documents but that the Applicant and her family have been hostile to him and that he has feared for his life. He claims that if the execution was to proceed, his appeal which he has filed will be rendered nugatory.
8. I have carefully considered the Applicant’s application as well as the opposition to the same by the Respondent. I have also considered the oral submissions made during the hearing of the application. The only issue for determination is whether the Applicant has demonstrated that she deserves the orders sought.
9. It is apparent from the affidavit of the Respondent that he is not willing to sign the conveyancing documents. At one stage, he claims that the title is lost and at another stage, he claims that it is the Applicant and her family who are preventing him from signing the conveyancing documents as he fears for his life. The Respondent is being economical with the truth. It is clear that he is unwilling to sign the documents.
10. The Respondent has not denied the fact that his son disrupted the survey exercise which was at its tail end. This being the case, it is necessary that Police ensure that there is security during the time the surveyor will go to the ground to pick the coordinates. I find that the Applicant’s application is well founded. I allow it in terms of prayers (2), (3), (4), and (5).
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET ON THIS 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023. E. O. OBAGAJUDGEIn the virtual presence of;Ms. Kayeli for Mr. Sambu for Defendant/Applicant.Mr. Mwangi for Mr. Kibet for Plaintiff/Respondent.