[2010] KEHC 3915 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff is the absolute registered owner of the land parcel No. EMBU/KITHUNTHIRU/268, as evidenced by the title deed, extract of the register, and certificate of official search, all of which showed no encumbrances and listed the plaintiff as sole proprietor. The defendant, having failed...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 3915 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: James Nguru Kathuri; Defendant: Duncan Runji Kathuri
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 82 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Judgment
- Outcome
- judgment for the plaintiff
- Judges
- J Karanja
- Legal Topics
- Land Ownership, Trespass, Eviction, Title Deeds
- 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
James Nguru Kathuri
Plaintiff
Duncan Runji Kathuri
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is the absolute registered owner of land parcel No. EMBU/KITHUNTHIRU/268.
- 2 Whether the defendant has any legal right or claim to remain on the said land against the plaintiff's wishes.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to orders of eviction and costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff is the absolute registered owner of the land parcel No. EMBU/KITHUNTHIRU/268, as evidenced by the title deed, extract of the register, and certificate of official search, all of which showed no encumbrances and listed the plaintiff as sole proprietor. The defendant, having failed to enter appearance or file a defence, did not present any evidence or claim to the property. In the absence of any rebuttal or competing claim, the court held that the plaintiff's ownership was proved on a balance of probabilities. The defendant's continued occupation of the land was therefore unlawful, and the plaintiff was entitled to orders for the defendant to vacate or be...
Court Disposition
judgment for the plaintiff
Orders
- The defendant shall vacate land parcel No. EMBU/KITHUNTHIRU/268 within 3 months of the judgment.
- If the defendant fails to vacate within 3 months, the plaintiff is at liberty to evict him without further recourse to the court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT EMBU Civil Case 82 of 2007
JAMES NGURU KATHURI…………………………………………….PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
DUNCAN RUNJI KATHURI…………………………………………DEFENDANT
J U D G M E N T
The plaintiff herein James Nguru is the defendant’s brother. The plaintiff is the absolute registered owner of land parcel No. EMBU/KITHUNTHIRU/268measuring approximately 1. 4 Ha as evidenced by the Title Deed dated 29/9/2006, P Exh 1, the extract of the register of Title (P Exh2) and the certificate of official search dated 24/3/2009.
According to the plaintiff, the defendant went to the said land without his permission and started living there. Efforts by the plaintiff to have him leave failed to bear any fruits hence the institution of this suit on 27/6/2007 vide the plaint dated 20/6/2007. He is asking the court for the following orders:-
(a)That the Defendant do vacate from the land parcel No.EMBU/KITHUNTHIRI/268.
(b) Alternatively, be evicted from the said land parcel.
(c) General damages for the destruction occasioned by the trespass and
(d) Costs of the suit and interest thereon at court rates.
The defendant was duly served with the plaint and summons to enter an appearance on 2/7/2007 but he did not enter an appearance and nor did he file any defence. The matter therefore proceeded by way of formal proof with the plaintiff producing the documents to prove ownership of the said parcel of land. There is no doubt that the plaintiff is the registered owner of the said parcel as reflected in the Title Deed, extract of Title and the certificate of search. The said Title Deed does not show any encumbrances and the plaintiff is the sole proprietor. The defendant failed to file any defence and it is not clear therefore whether he has any claim on the plaintiff’s property. In the absence of any other document to rebut the evidence of ownership relied on by the plaintiff, the court finds the plaintiff’s case proved on a balance of probability. I find that the land in question belongs to him and that the defendant has no colour of right or claim over the same. He should not therefore remain on the plaintiff’s plot against the plaintiff’s wishes.
Accordingly, I enter Judgment in favour of the plaintiff and order that the Defendant vacates the plaintiff’s said plot within 3 months of the delivery of this Judgment failing which the plaintiff should be at liberty to evict him without further recourse to this court.
I nonetheless find that the general damages claimed were not proved and I will not therefore award any as prayed in prayer (c) of the plaint. The plaintiff is nonetheless awarded the costs of this suit plus costs and interest thereon at court rates.
W. KARANJA
JUDGE
Signed, delivered and dated at Embu this 17th day of February, 2010
In presence of:- Plaintiff – present
defendant - absent