[2013] KEHC 6798 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was entitled to the orders sought because a previous court order had directed that the property revert to her name, and this had not been effected due to lack of cooperation by the respondent. The respondent, having been served, did not oppose the application. The court held that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 6798 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Rose Agiza Ndeyi Keyonzo; Respondent: Mary Wanjiru Kapaito
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 292 of 1991
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Execution of Transfer and Rectification of Land Register
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Rectification of Land Register, Execution of Court Orders, Title Reversion
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rose Agiza Ndeyi Keyonzo
Applicant
Mary Wanjiru Kapaito
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Execution of Transfer and Rectification of Land Register
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should order execution of transfer documents to effect transfer of Ngong/Ngong/10249 to the applicant.
- 2 Whether the Land Registrar should cancel the registration of Mary Wanjiru Kapaito and substitute the applicant as proprietor.
- 3 Whether the previous court order for reversion of title has been complied with.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was entitled to the orders sought because a previous court order had directed that the property revert to her name, and this had not been effected due to lack of cooperation by the respondent. The respondent, having been served, did not oppose the application. The court held that it was necessary to grant the orders to give effect to its earlier decision and ensure compliance with the law regarding rectification of the land register. The Deputy Registrar was therefore authorized to execute the necessary transfer documents, and the Land Registrar was directed to cancel the respondent's registration and substitute the applicant as proprietor. Costs were...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The Deputy Registrar is authorized to execute transfer documents to effect transfer of Ngong/Ngong/10249 to the applicant.
- The Land Registrar at Ngong lands office is directed to cancel the registration of Mary Wanjiru Kapaito as proprietor of Ngong/Ngong/10249 and substitute the applicant's name.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MILIMANI
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 292 OF 1991
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF KAPAITO OLE PARIMBAI – (DECEASED)
RULING
The application dated 28th February 2012 seeks orders that the Deputy Registrar of this court do execute transfer documents to effect transfer of Ngong/Ngong/10249 to the applicant and that the Land Registrar at the Ngong lands office do cancel the registration of Mary Wanjiru Kapaito as properties of Ngong/Ngong/10249 and substitute her name will that of the applicant.
The background is that the said property was originally registered in the name of the applicant. There is a title deed dated 22nd July 1993 which attests to this. Under unclear circumstances, the name of the applicant was removed from the register and replaced with that of Mary Wanjiru Kapaito. A title deed issued in the name of Mary Wanjiru Kapaito is annexed to the application and is dated 18th August, 2004.
That matter was litigated upon in this cause and on 10th June 2005, Koome J, as she then was, held that Ngong/Ngong/10249 ought not have been registered in the name of Mary Wanjiru Kapaito and ordered that the said title do revert to the previous registratered proprietor, Rose Agiza Ndeyi Keyonzo.
The applicant's case is that the reversion ordered by the court in this cause on 10th June 2005 has not yet happened, despite all the efforts she has made towards that end. It is for these reasons that she would like the court to intervene.
There is on record affidavits of service, sworn on 13th March 2012 and 2nd April 2012 respectively, showing that the application was served on counsel for the respondent, Mary Wanjiru Kapaito.
The application is not opposed as the respondent has not filed documents in reply to it.
In the circumstances, the orders sought in the said application are for granting, and I do hereby allow the said application in the terms proposed. As it is lack of cooperation by the respondent which has provoked this application, the applicant shall have costs thereof.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 8th DAY OF November, 2013.
W. M. MUSYOKA
JUDGE