[2018] KEELC 4167 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had established her claim to Plot No. 439 at Chepchoina Settlement Scheme Phase 1 by producing documentary evidence of allocation, payment, and ongoing processing of title. The defendant, despite being served and aware of the hearing date, failed to attend or present any evidence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 4167 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Emily Sikuku Momanyi; Defendant: Rotino Moiben Lotiolo
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 17 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Land Case / Judgment
- Outcome
- judgment for the plaintiff
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Ownership Disputes, Eviction, Permanent Injunction, Allocation of Land, Settlement Schemes
- 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
Emily Sikuku Momanyi
Plaintiff
Rotino Moiben Lotiolo
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is the legal owner of Plot No. 439 at Chepchoina Settlement Scheme Phase 1.
- 2 Whether the defendant unlawfully entered and occupied the plaintiff's land.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an order of eviction and permanent injunction against the defendant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had established her claim to Plot No. 439 at Chepchoina Settlement Scheme Phase 1 by producing documentary evidence of allocation, payment, and ongoing processing of title. The defendant, despite being served and aware of the hearing date, failed to attend or present any evidence in support of his defence. The court held that the plaintiff's evidence was uncontroverted and sufficient to prove her ownership and right to exclusive possession. Consequently, the court granted the plaintiff's prayers for a declaration of ownership, eviction of the defendant, and a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's use and...
Court Disposition
judgment for the plaintiff
Orders
- A declaration that the plaintiff is the legal owner of Plot No. 439 at Chepchoina Settlement Scheme Phase 1.
- The defendant and those claiming under him to vacate the said plot, failing which they be evicted forthwith at their own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KITALE
LAND CASE NO. 17 OF 2013
EMILY SIKUKU MOMANYI........................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ROTINO MOIBEN LOTIOLO...................................DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
1. In the plaint dated 18/2/2013 filed in this suit on 19/2/2013, the plaintiff prays for the following orders against the defendant:-
(a) A declaration that the plaintiff is the legal owner of Plot No. 439 measuring approximately 2. 13 hectares at Chepchoina Settlement Scheme Phase 1 and that the defendant and those claiming under him do move out of the said plot and failing which they be evicted forthwith at their own costs.
(b) An order of permanent injunction restraining the defendant and all those claiming under him from interfering with the plaintiff’s user and quiet enjoyment of the suit land.
(c) Costs of the suit.
(d) Any other relief this Honourable court may deem just to fit to grant.
2. The plaintiff pleaded in the body of the plaint that she was allocated Plot No. 439 measuring approximately 2. 13 Ha by the Director of Land Adjudication and Settlement on or about 22/8/2008 and that she has fully paid the requisite Settlement Fund Trustee Loan.
3. However, in the year 2011 the defendant illegally entered the plaintiff’s said land and ploughed it and planted maize thereon and has remained thereon todate.
4. The plaintiff avers that her efforts to have the defendant vacate the land were not fruitful but were met with violence against her which prompted the arrest and arraignment of the defendant in court on charges of assault contrary to Section 251 of the Penal Code at the Kitale Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 610 of 2011. Even as that case was pending, the plaintiff stated, the defendant continued occupying the land and threatening her with violence and death.
5. The defendant filed defence in this suit on 10/4/2013, and the plaintiff filed a reply to defence dated 17/6/2013. However the defendant did not attend court or call evidence to aid his defence when this suit came up for hearing on 11/12/2017 despite the fact that he had notice of the hearing date, it having been taken by consent in court on 22/8/2017. The hearing proceeded exparte.
6. The plaintiff gave evidence in support of her claim. She substantially reiterated the matters raised in the plaint. She produced a copy of the allotment letter issued by the Director of Land Adjudication and Settlement as P. Exhibit 1 and receipt dated 14/11/2008 and 14/2/2012 respectively for Kshs.2885/= and Kshs.3000/= respectively.
7. The plaintiff avers that she was shown the location of Plot No. 439 after the payments were receipted. She also testified that the title documents in respect of the suit land are currently being processed. She produced a copy of a transfer and a discharge of charge as evidence. The copy of transfer shows that LR. No. Kwanza District/Chepchoina Phase 1/439 is to be transferred from the Settlement Fund Trustees to the plaintiff. The discharge of charge for the same property bears the plaintiff’s name and identity card number.
I find that the plaintiff has established her claim against the defendant on a balance of probabilities. I therefore enter judgment in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant in terms of Prayers (a), (b)and(c) of the Plaintdated 18/2/2013.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kitale on this 6th day of February, 2018.
MWANGI NJOROGE
JUDGE
6/2/2018
Coram:
Before - Mwangi Njoroge, Judge
Court Assistant - Picoty
Mr. Majanga holding brief for Chebii for the plaintiff
COURT
Judgment read in open court in the presence of counsel for the plaintiff.
MWANGI NJOROGE
JUDGE
6/2/2018