[2015] KEELC 355 (KLR)

[2015] KEELC 355 (KLR)

The court found that although the plaintiff executed a sale agreement and transfer document for the suit property in 1985, the transfer was never registered due to an embargo and subsequent rejection by the District Land Registrar. The plaintiff failed to explain the delay of over 30 years in filing the suit after...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEELC 355 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Fredrick Kivala Nzuki; Defendant: Allexander Toya Iha; Defendant: Commissioner of Lands; Defendant: Honourable Attorney General; Defendant: Registrar of Lands, Kilifi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 107 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Judgment
Outcome
plaint dismissed
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Limitation of Actions, Land Transfer, Registration of Title
Source Language
en
Land and Property Adverse Possession Limitation of Actions Land Transfer Registration of Title

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fredrick Kivala Nzuki

Plaintiff

Allexander Toya Iha

Defendant

Commissioner of Lands

Defendant

Honourable Attorney General

Defendant

Registrar of Lands, Kilifi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of ownership of parcel Kilifi/Jimba/276.
  2. 2 Whether the suit is time-barred under the Limitation of Actions Act.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff has proved his case on a balance of probabilities.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the plaintiff executed a sale agreement and transfer document for the suit property in 1985, the transfer was never registered due to an embargo and subsequent rejection by the District Land Registrar. The plaintiff failed to explain the delay of over 30 years in filing the suit after the rejection of registration. The court held that the suit should have been filed within twelve years from the date the District Land Registrar declined to register the transfer. Consequently, the claim was time-barred under the Limitation of Actions Act. The plaintiff did not prove his case on a balance of probabilities, and therefore, the suit was dismissed.

Court Disposition

plaint dismissed

Orders

  • The plaintiff's plaint dated 23rd April 2014 is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.