[2017] KEHC 7072 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff is the registered owner of the suit land, Kilili/Sikhendu/212, and that the defendants failed to provide any credible evidence to support their claims of entitlement or occupation. The only defendant who testified did not prove any legal or equitable right to the land, and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 7072 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: David Nasoruta M Muhindi; Defendant: Eliud Sangura Walikhe; Defendant: Alfred Walikhe Sangura; Defendant: John Wanyama Walikhe; Defendant: John Murumba Wafula; Defendant: Josec Ilaga Ojoki; Defendant: Isaac Oteba Muchi; Defendant: Stephen Wekunda; Defendant: Pius Kisenge Kilongi; Defendant: Cleophas Juma of Wachia
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 255 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Land Case / Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's suit allowed; defendants' counterclaim dismissed with costs; eviction and permanent injunction granted.
- Judges
- SN Mukunya
- Legal Topics
- Ownership Disputes, Eviction, Title Registration, Injunctive Relief
- 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 Nasoruta M Muhindi
Plaintiff
Eliud Sangura Walikhe
Defendant
Alfred Walikhe Sangura
Defendant
John Wanyama Walikhe
Defendant
John Murumba Wafula
Defendant
Josec Ilaga Ojoki
Defendant
Isaac Oteba Muchi
Defendant
Stephen Wekunda
Defendant
Pius Kisenge Kilongi
Defendant
Cleophas Juma of Wachia
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is the registered owner of land parcel Kilili/Sikhendu/212.
- 2 Whether the defendants have any lawful claim or right to occupy the suit land.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction and eviction orders against the defendants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff is the registered owner of the suit land, Kilili/Sikhendu/212, and that the defendants failed to provide any credible evidence to support their claims of entitlement or occupation. The only defendant who testified did not prove any legal or equitable right to the land, and the other defendants neither appeared nor tendered evidence. The counterclaim was general, unspecific, and unsupported by evidence. On the balance of probabilities, the plaintiff's claim was established, and the defendants' counterclaim was dismissed. The court ordered the eviction of the defendants and granted a permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with the...
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's suit allowed; defendants' counterclaim dismissed with costs; eviction and permanent injunction granted.
Orders
- Plaintiff's suit is allowed.
- Defendants' counterclaim is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA
Environment And Land Case No. 255 Of 2013.
DAVID NASORUTA M MUHINDI …..................................PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT
VERSUS.
ELIUD SANGURA WALLIKHE……………………….1ST DEFENDANT/AAPLICANT.
ALFRED WALIKHE SANGURA………………………2ND DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.
JOHN WANYAMA WALIKHE……………….……… 3RD DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.
JOHN MURUMBA WAFULA …................................ 4TH DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.
JOSEC ILAGA OJOKI ……………………………… 5TH DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.
ISAAC OTEBA MUCHI ………………………….....… 6TH DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.
STEPHEN WEKUNDA ……………………………..… 7TH DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.
PIUS KISENGE KILONGI ……………………….....…. 8TH DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.
CLEOPHAS JUMA OF WACHIA……………..…....... 9TH DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.
JUDGMENT.
[1] The plaintiff filed this suit against the defendant claiming for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants whether themselves and/or their servants from claiming and interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful and quiet possession of land parcel No. Kilili/Sikhendu/212 measuring approximately 14. 5 acres.
The plaintiff claims that he is the registered owner of the suit land. That the defendants without colour of right or express and/or implied permission has unlawfully interfered with the plaintiffs quiet enjoyment of the suit land. He avers that he has asked them to move out and they have refused to do so.
[2] The defendant filed their defences. Eliud Sangura Walikhe said in his defence that his father and the plaintiffs father were brothers. He said a portion of his fathers land was registered in the plaintiffs fathers land and that their fathers died before the dispute was determined. Mr. Josek Ilaga Ojeki alleged that he was a purchaser from a deceased person who also purchased from a deceased person while Jafred Walikhe Sangura 2nd defendant said that his father bought a portion from the brother of the plaintiff. The 7th defendant said that he bought I acre from the brother of the plaintiff in 1996. the 4th defendant said he had occupied that land which was sold to him by his uncle Ben Wekhanya Balayo.
[3] The defendants further filed a general defence through J.S. Khakula & Co. advocates and put a general and unspecific counterclaim. The counter claim was replied to generally by the advocates for the plaintiff. During the hearing, the plaintiff adopted his statement and produced a copy of the title deed of land parcel in issue and closed his case. Of the defendants only Eliud Sangura Walikhe gave evidence. He said that he was a neighbour of the father of the plaintiff. He said that when the land was registered their land was registered in the name of Yohana 1963. that the said Yohana died before they resolved the issue.
[4] Having heard the case for the plaintiff and the evidence of the defendants there is only one thing for certain that the suit land is in the name of the plaintiff. There was absolutely no proof of the allegation by the 1st defendant. The other defendants did not come to court. They tendered no evidence.
[5] On the balance of probability, I allow the plaintiffs suit and dismiss the counter claim by the defendant with costs and order the eviction of the defendants from the plaintiffs land.
It is so ordered.
Judgment read in open court.
DATEDandDELIVERED atBUNGOMAthis 10thday ofMarch2017.
S. MUKUNYA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Court Assistants Chemtai/Joy
Mr. Makokha for the Plaintiff
Mr. Musumba for Khakula for the defendants