[2018] KEELC 4615 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 4615 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had established, on a balance of probabilities, that he was the beneficial owner of Plot No. C89 and that the defendant had encroached onto a portion of this plot and erected structures thereon. The plaintiff's evidence, including documentary proof and a valuation report, was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 4615 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: John Makeri Kimani; Defendant: Leah S. Waruingi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 818 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff.
Judges
BM Eboso
Legal Topics
Land Encroachment, Compensation for Land, Unsurveyed Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Land Encroachment Compensation for Land Unsurveyed Land Disputes

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Makeri Kimani

Plaintiff

Leah S. Waruingi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant unlawfully encroached onto the plaintiff's plot No. C.89 at Langata Development Company Limited Estate.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to compensation for the value of the encroached portion or demolition of the defendant's structures.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had established, on a balance of probabilities, that he was the beneficial owner of Plot No. C89 and that the defendant had encroached onto a portion of this plot and erected structures thereon. The plaintiff's evidence, including documentary proof and a valuation report, was unchallenged due to the defendant's failure to participate in the proceedings. The court determined that compensation for the value of the encroached portion, rather than a declaratory order or demolition, was the most appropriate remedy given the unsurveyed and untitled nature of the land. Accordingly, the court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff Kshs. 370,000 plus interest...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff.

Orders

  • The defendant shall pay compensation to the plaintiff for the value of the encroached portion of land in the sum of Kshs. 370,000 together with interest thereon from the date of this judgment.
  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff costs of this suit.