[2017] KEHC 2908 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 2908 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff, Jonathan Namulala Nyongesa, was the true and lawful owner of the suit land and did not participate in or authorize the sale. The transfer to the 1st defendant was effected through a fraudulent scheme involving impersonation, forged documents (ID, PIN, title deed), and collusion...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 2908 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Jonathan Namulala Nyongesa; Defendant: Multi Business Shooters Investors Ltd; Defendant: Family Bank Limited; Defendant: Hon. Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya; Defendant: Alex Juma Wakite alias Ali Juma Wakite
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Bungoma
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 51 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff. Orders granted as prayed with costs and interest against the defendants jointly and severally.
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Land Transfer, Forgery of Title Deeds, Impersonation in Property Transactions, Invalid Land Control Consent, Bank Financing Due Diligence, Rectification of Land Register
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Fraudulent Land Transfer Forgery of Title Deeds Impersonation in Property Transactions Invalid Land Control Consent Bank Financing Due Diligence Rectification of Land Register

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jonathan Namulala Nyongesa

Plaintiff

Multi Business Shooters Investors Ltd

Defendant

Family Bank Limited

Defendant

Hon. Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya

Defendant

Alex Juma Wakite alias Ali Juma Wakite

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the transfer of land parcel E. Bukusu/S. Kanduyi/485 from the plaintiff to the 1st defendant was fraudulent.
  2. 2 Whether the charge registered in favour of the 2nd defendant (Family Bank) was valid and supported by proper consent and documentation.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to cancellation of the title and restoration of ownership.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff, Jonathan Namulala Nyongesa, was the true and lawful owner of the suit land and did not participate in or authorize the sale. The transfer to the 1st defendant was effected through a fraudulent scheme involving impersonation, forged documents (ID, PIN, title deed), and collusion among the defendants. The Land Registrar failed in his statutory duty by registering the transfer and charge based on manifestly irregular and forged documents, including a title deed purporting to be issued under an Act not in force at the relevant date, and a Land Control Board consent granted to a party not yet registered as proprietor. The 2nd defendant (Family Bank) failed...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff. Orders granted as prayed with costs and interest against the defendants jointly and severally.

Orders

  • A declaration that the plaintiff is and has always been the owner and proprietor of E. Bukusu/S. Kanduyi/485.
  • An order cancelling, annulling, and revoking the registration of the suit land in the name of the 1st defendant and the charge to the 2nd defendant.