[2016] KEHC 5146 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 5146 (KLR)

The court found that the 1st Defendant was only entitled to eight acres of the suit land as per the sale agreement with the Plaintiff's late father. The registration of the entire 12 acres in the 1st Defendant's name was not in accordance with the agreement, but the 1st Defendant conceded to the Plaintiff's claim...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEHC 5146 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Jacob Nyakwa Ojwang; Defendant: Nathwalal Narshidas Ghelani; Defendant: Joshua Omari T/A Sedime Agencies; Defendant: Samwel Ogweno Oketch; Defendant: Mathews Owinyo Odera; Defendant: Joshua Ongwen Wagude; Defendant: The District Land Registrar Kisumu
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Land Case 232 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff in part
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Land Transfer, Land Registration, Trusteeship, Adjudication of Land, Subdivision of Land, Rectification of Register
Source Language
en
Land and Property Fraudulent Land Transfer Land Registration Trusteeship Adjudication of Land Subdivision of Land Rectification of Register

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacob Nyakwa Ojwang

Plaintiff

Nathwalal Narshidas Ghelani

Defendant

Joshua Omari T/A Sedime Agencies

Defendant

Samwel Ogweno Oketch

Defendant

Mathews Owinyo Odera

Defendant

Joshua Ongwen Wagude

Defendant

The District Land Registrar Kisumu

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Defendant was entitled to be registered as proprietor of the whole suit land or only eight acres of the same.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff, as the administrator of his father's estate, is entitled to be registered with four acres out of the suit land.
  3. 3 Whether the transactions registered on the suit land's register after the second entry should be cancelled.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 1st Defendant was only entitled to eight acres of the suit land as per the sale agreement with the Plaintiff's late father. The registration of the entire 12 acres in the 1st Defendant's name was not in accordance with the agreement, but the 1st Defendant conceded to the Plaintiff's claim for four acres. The subsequent transfers and registrations in favour of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Defendants were found to have been made unprocedurally, unlawfully, and fraudulently, as there was no evidence of proper transfer or consent from the 1st Defendant. The Plaintiff, as administrator of his father's estate, was entitled to four acres. The court ordered the cancellation of...

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff in part

Orders

  • All entries in the register of Kisumu/Kanyakwar 'B'/396 after the second entry are declared void and are to be cancelled by the Land Registrar.
  • A declaration is issued that the 1st Defendant is entitled to eight acres, and the Plaintiff, as administrator, is entitled to four acres of Kisumu/Kanyakwar 'B'/396.