[2010] KEHC 3620 (KLR)

[2010] KEHC 3620 (KLR)

The court found that the Riruta Satellite Women Umoja Group had occupied and developed the property known as Dagoretti/Rirutta/S68 for over 12 years without interruption. The defendant, despite being served, did not contest the suit or provide evidence to the contrary. The court accepted the plaintiff's evidence as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] KEHC 3620 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Grace Wambui Kamau (Suing on behalf of Riruta Satellite Women Umoja Group); Defendant: Philomena Wambui Munge
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 77 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim allowed. Orders granted as prayed in the Originating Summons.
Judges
A Mbogholi-Msagha
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Injunctions, Registration of Title
Source Language
en
Land and Property Adverse Possession Injunctions 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

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

Plaintiff

Philomena Wambui Munge

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether Riruta Satellite Women Umoja Group has become entitled by adverse possession to be registered as the proprietor of Title No.Dagoretti/Rirutta/S68.
  2. 2 Whether the group is entitled to an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with their possession of the property.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to costs of the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Riruta Satellite Women Umoja Group had occupied and developed the property known as Dagoretti/Rirutta/S68 for over 12 years without interruption. The defendant, despite being served, did not contest the suit or provide evidence to the contrary. The court accepted the plaintiff's evidence as truthful and unchallenged. Applying the doctrine of adverse possession under the Limitation of Actions Act, the court held that the group had met the legal requirements for registration as proprietors. The court also found it appropriate to grant an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the group's possession, and awarded costs to the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim allowed. Orders granted as prayed in the Originating Summons.

Orders

  • The plaintiffs are entitled to be registered as proprietors of Title No.Dagoretti/Rirutta/S68.
  • An injunction is granted restraining the defendant or any person claiming under her from interfering with the group's quiet possession of the property.