[2015] KEELC 631 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff's evidence of ownership was uncontroverted, supported by the title deed and registration documents. The defendant failed to file any defence or provide evidence of a legal right to occupy the suit property. Under Section 25 of the Land Registration Act, the plaintiff, as registered...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEELC 631 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: David Mutali Ingunyi; Defendant: Fredrick M Obare
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 443 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment for the plaintiff; eviction and injunction orders granted.
- Judges
- MA Silau
- Legal Topics
- Eviction, Ownership Dispute, Title Registration
- 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
David Mutali Ingunyi
Plaintiff
Fredrick M Obare
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is the lawful proprietor of land parcel Nakuru/Molo Kapsita/372.
- 2 Whether the defendant has any lawful right to occupy the suit property.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an eviction order against the defendant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff's evidence of ownership was uncontroverted, supported by the title deed and registration documents. The defendant failed to file any defence or provide evidence of a legal right to occupy the suit property. Under Section 25 of the Land Registration Act, the plaintiff, as registered proprietor, is entitled to exclusive possession and protection of his rights. The defendant's claim to a different parcel did not affect the plaintiff's rights over the suit land. The court therefore declared the plaintiff the lawful proprietor, ordered the defendant to vacate, and granted a permanent injunction against the defendant's occupation of the land.
Court Disposition
Judgment for the plaintiff; eviction and injunction orders granted.
Orders
- The plaintiff is declared the lawful proprietor of land parcel Nakuru/Molo Kapsita/372.
- The defendant is ordered to vacate the suit land within 14 days of service of judgment/decree; failing which, eviction to be carried out at the defendant's expense.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
ELC NO 443 OF 2013
DAVID MUTALI INGUNYI…………….PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
FREDRICK M OBARE ……….……DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
(Suit for eviction; plaintiff being owner of suit property; defendant not filing any defence; plaintiff's suit uncontested; judgment entered for the plaintiff)
This suit was commenced by way of plaint filed on 26 June 2013. Despite being served with summons, the defendant has not entered appearance nor filed any defence. Neither did he appear during the hearing of this matter although he was served with a hearing notice.
The case of the plaintiff is that he is the lawful owner of the land parcel Nakuru/Molo Kapsita/372. He became registered as proprietor on 9 July 2001. Despite being proprietor, the defendant has encroached into his land and has refused to vacate despite being asked to do so. In his pleadings, the plaintiff has asked for an eviction order and costs of the suit.
The plaintiff testified that he purchased the land and eventually became registered as proprietor. He farmed the land for a while. In the year 2006, he was in Molo town and saw a homeless old lady putting up a polythene house. Apparently out of sympathy, he offered to allow her use of his land. The old lady utilized the land until the post election violence of 2008. When the plaintiff went to visit the land, he found the old lady had left and discovered the defendant on the land. The defendant had gone ahead to put up structures of his own. He asked the defendant to leave but the defendant stated that he had bought the land. In his evidence, the plaintiff stated that the defendant replied to his demand letter stating that he had purchased the land parcel Nakuru/ Molo Kapsita/354 from one Isaac Omboto. The plaintiff produced the map of the area and stated that the plot No. 354 is at least three plots from the suit land (although I have seen from the map that the two plots abut each other). It was his view that the defendant should be evicted.
I have considered the pleadings and the evidence. The evidence of the plaintiff is uncontroverted. He produced the title deed to the suit land which shows that he is the lawful proprietor of it. As proprietor, he is vested with all rights of proprietorship, including the right to exclusive possession. These are set out in the Land Registration Act at Section 25 which provides as follows:-
S. 25. (1) The rights of a proprietor, whether acquired on first registration or subsequently for valuable consideration or by an order of court, shall not be liable to be defeated except as provided in this Act, and shall be held by the proprietor, together with all privileges and appurtenances belonging thereto, free from all other interests and claims whatsoever, but subject—
(a) to the leases, charges and other encumbrances and to the conditions and restrictions, if any, shown in the register; and
(b) to such liabilities, rights and interests as affect the same and are declared by section 28 not to require noting on the register, unless the contrary is expressed in the register.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be taken to relieve a proprietor from any duty or obligation to which the person is subject to as a trustee.
The defendant has not filed anything to assert any right over the suit land. I have no reason not to enter judgment for the plaintiff. I now make the following orders:-
(a) As against the defendant, the plaintiff is hereby declared the lawful proprietor of the land parcel Nakuru/ Molo Kapsita/372.
(b) I order the defendant to vacate the suit land within 14 days of service of this judgment and/or decree and if he fails to do so, an eviction order do issue, and eviction be done at the expense of the defendant.
(c) A permanent injunction is issued barring the defendant from the land parcel Nakuru/ Molo Kapsita/ 372.
(d) The defendant shall shoulder the costs of this suit.
It is so ordered.
Dated signed and delivered in open court at Nakuru this 10th day of February 2015.
MUNYAO SILA
JUDGE
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT NAKURU
In presence of:
Mrs Lilian Muthoni holding brieg for Mr Karanja
Mbugua for the plaintiff
Defendant: Absent
Emmanuel Maelo: court Assistant