https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3902

Gichuhi v Chief Land Registrar Nairobi Land Registry (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E033 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 3902 (KLR) (29 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 3902 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E033 of 2026 CG Mbogo, J June 29, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF: AN APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF A CAUTION & RESTRICTION AGAINST PARCEL LR. NO. DAGORETTI/RIRUTA/4791 AND IN THE MATTER OF: SECTIONS 73 (1) & 78 (2) OF THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT & ORDER 37 RULE 8 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES Between Francis Njenga Gichuhi Plaintiff and The Chief Land Registrar Nairobi Land Registry Defendant Ruling 1.Before this court for determination is the originating summons dated 27th January, 2026 filed by the plaintiff (the administrator of the estate of Margaret Wairimu Gichuhi) and it is expressed to be brought under Sections 73(1) and 78(2) of the Land Registration Act, Sections 3A and 63 (e) of the Civil Procedure Act, and Order 37 Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking the following orders:-a.That upon hearing the instant originating summons, this honourable court do issue an order directing the chief land registrar Nairobi to remove the caution and restriction registered in the encumbrance section against LR. No. Dagoretti/Riruta/ 4791 on 17th August, 2007 and 9th April, 2018 as entry numbers 4 and 5 respectively.b.That the costs of this suit be in the cause. 2.The originating summons is supported by the affidavit of the plaintiff sworn on even date and is premised on the grounds that he is one of the administrators of the estate of Margaret Wairimu Gichuhi (deceased) who is the registered owner of land parcel known as LR No. Dagoretti/Riruta/4791, the suit property. The plaintiff deposed that his co-administrator Peter Karanja Gichuhi (also deceased) had registered a caution against the suit property on 17th August, 2007 citing beneficial interest, but he passed on before he would cause the same to be removed on 7th September, 2016. 3.The plaintiff deposed that on 9th April, 2018 the defendant had also registered a restriction against the suit property pending the conclusion of the succession cause in respect of the estate of Margaret Wairimu Gichuhi (deceased). It was deposed that succession cause 1611 of 2010 was concluded through court annexed mediation cause reference No. MLM/MED/821 of 2024 which was adopted through the certificate of confirmation of grant dated 14th July, 2025. 4.Upon conclusion of the pending succession cause in respect of the estate of the registered owner of the suit property, the plaintiff commenced the execution process by applying for the removal of the said caution. However, the same was rejected, and the directions given was that there must be an order directing the said removal. The plaintiff deposed that it is only fair and in the interest of justice that the orders sought are granted as prayed in order for the ends of justice to be met. 5.The defendant did not file any response to the application. The originating summons was canvassed through written submissions. The plaintiff filed written submissions dated 23rd March, 2026. I have considered the application and written submissions filed by the plaintiff. The issue for determination is whether the application has merit. 6.The plaintiff in this matter is seeking an order for the removal of the caution and restriction registered against the suit property. The caution was placed by Peter Karanja Gichuhi (deceased) and the restriction was placed by the defendant. 7.Cautions and restrictions are provided by the Land Registration Act Cap 300 at Part VII thereof. A caution is defined by the Act as:-“a notice in the form of a register to the effect that no action of a specified nature in relation to the land in respect of which the notice has been entered may be taken without first informing the person who gave the notice; or a caveat.” 8.A restriction is defined by the Act as:“restriction" means an interest registered under section 76 and includes the registrar’s caveat.” 9.Both caution and restriction are meant to protect the interest over the land of the one who registers the same and can prohibit dealings with any particular land, lease or charge for a time or until a further order is made. In the present case, the plaintiff states that he was directed by the defendant to obtain an order in order for the registered caution and restriction to be removed. 10.Section 73 of the Land Registration Act Cap 300 gives the court the mandate to remove a caution and Section 78 (2) of the Act and also mandates the court to issue an order to remove a restriction. 11.Having been satisfied that succession cause no. 1611 of 2010 was concluded and confirmation of grant issued, there is no other reason why the caution and the restriction should not be removed and or lifted. Thus, I find merit in the originating summons dated 27th January, 2026 and the same is allowed in the following terms:-i.The Chief Land Registrar Nairobi is hereby ordered to remove forthwith the caution and restriction registered in the encumbrance section against LR. No. Dagoretti/Riruta/ 4791 on 17th August, 2007 and 9th April, 2018 as entry numbers 4 and 5 respectively.ii.The plaintiff to bear his own costs.It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED & DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026.HON. MBOGO C.G.JUDGE29/06/2026.In the presence of:Ms. Benson Agunga - Court assistantMr. Matwere for the Plaintiff/Applicant