[2018] KEELC 4112 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 4112 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff and his family had been in open, continuous, and exclusive possession of the suit land since 1985, following the purchase by the plaintiff's late father and full payment of the purchase price. The defendants, as successors of the original owner, were not in occupation and only...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 4112 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Joel Shitanda Khuro; Defendant: Jacob Wekesa Werunga; Defendant: Isaya Wekesa Werunga
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 19 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff
Judges
NA Matheka
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Limitation of Actions, Succession and Transfer of Land
Source Language
en
Land and Property Adverse Possession Limitation of Actions Succession and Transfer of Land

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joel Shitanda Khuro

Plaintiff

Jacob Wekesa Werunga

Defendant

Isaya Wekesa Werunga

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has been in continuous, open, and exclusive possession of land parcel No. N. KABRAS/MALAVA/1703 for more than twelve years.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to be registered as the owner of the suit land by virtue of adverse possession under the Limitation of Actions Act.
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' title to the suit land has been extinguished by operation of law due to adverse possession.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff and his family had been in open, continuous, and exclusive possession of the suit land since 1985, following the purchase by the plaintiff's late father and full payment of the purchase price. The defendants, as successors of the original owner, were not in occupation and only registered themselves as proprietors through succession without involving the plaintiff's family. Applying the principles from Wambugu v Njuguna and the Limitation of Actions Act, the court held that the plaintiff's possession became adverse after the final payment in 1989, and by 2002, the statutory period of twelve years had lapsed. The defendants' title was extinguished by...

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • A declaration that the defendants' right over the whole of land parcel No. N. KABRAS/MALAVA/1703 is extinguished by operation of law due to adverse possession.
  • The whole of land parcel No. N. KABRAS/MALAVA/1703 vests in the plaintiff, who shall be registered as owner under section 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act.