[2017] KEELC 1725 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 1725 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff's deceased husband was the registered proprietor of the suit land and that the Plaintiff, as administrator of his estate, had produced uncontroverted evidence showing that the land was transferred to the 1st Defendant six years after the registered proprietor's death. There was no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 1725 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Esther Mutile Mutiso; Defendant: Rose Mueni Schultz; Defendant: Machakos District Land Registrar
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 272 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's suit allowed as prayed.
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Transfer, Rectification of Register, Title Cancellation
Source Language
en
Land and Property Fraudulent Transfer Rectification of Register Title Cancellation

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Esther Mutile Mutiso

Plaintiff

Rose Mueni Schultz

Defendant

Machakos District Land Registrar

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the transfer of the suit land to the 1st Defendant was fraudulent.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to cancellation of the 1st Defendant's title and rectification of the land register.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff's deceased husband was the registered proprietor of the suit land and that the Plaintiff, as administrator of his estate, had produced uncontroverted evidence showing that the land was transferred to the 1st Defendant six years after the registered proprietor's death. There was no evidence of a sale or consent from the estate, and the 1st Defendant failed to contest the claim. The court held that the transfer was fraudulent and therefore null and void. Consequently, the Plaintiff was entitled to cancellation of the 1st Defendant's title and rectification of the register to reflect the name of the deceased proprietor.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's suit allowed as prayed.

Orders

  • The transfer of the suit land to the 1st Defendant is declared null and void.
  • The 2nd Defendant is directed to rectify the land register to reflect the name of the Plaintiff's deceased husband as proprietor.