[2018] KEELC 4423 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 4423 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs, through Riruta Satellite Women Umoja Group, had been in continuous, open, exclusive, and peaceful possession of Dagoretti/Riruta/S.68 since 1987, constructing rental units and deriving income without the defendant's authority. The defendant became aware of the plaintiffs'...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 4423 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Grace Wambui Kamau (suing on behalf of Riruta Satellite Women Group); Defendant: Philomena Wambui
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 77 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiffs' claim for adverse possession allowed; defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
Judges
AK Bor
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Title Registration, Injunctions, Land Ownership Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Adverse Possession Title Registration Injunctions Land Ownership Disputes

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grace Wambui Kamau (suing on behalf of Riruta Satellite Women Group)

Plaintiff

Philomena Wambui

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have acquired title to Dagoretti/Riruta/S.68 by adverse possession.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with their possession.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's counterclaim for eviction and declaration of unlawful occupation should succeed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs, through Riruta Satellite Women Umoja Group, had been in continuous, open, exclusive, and peaceful possession of Dagoretti/Riruta/S.68 since 1987, constructing rental units and deriving income without the defendant's authority. The defendant became aware of the plaintiffs' possession in 1999 but took no effective steps to assert her rights. The plaintiffs' occupation met all the legal requirements for adverse possession under the Limitation of Actions Act. The court held that the plaintiffs had acquired title by adverse possession and were entitled to be registered as proprietors. The defendant's counterclaim for eviction and declaration of unlawful...

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' claim for adverse possession allowed; defendant's counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs to be registered as proprietors of Dagoretti/Riruta/S.68 by adverse possession.
  • An injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession of the suit property is granted.