[2012] KEHC 2367 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiff had demonstrated exclusive and uninterrupted possession of the suit properties for more than 12 years, with no challenge from the registered owner or any other party. The Plaintiff's evidence was uncontroverted, and the court was satisfied that the requirements for adverse...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 2367 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Karisa Ponda; Respondent: Jukana (K) Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 619 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Originating Summons / Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's claim for adverse possession allowed; Plaintiff declared owner of the suit properties; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- F Tuiyott
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Land Registration, Title by Prescription
- 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
Joseph Karisa Ponda
Applicant
Jukana (K) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Plaintiff is a beneficiary by virtue of adverse possession of Plot No. 7103/1/MN and Plot No. 7104/1/MN.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to be registered as the owner of the suit plots by virtue of adverse possession.
- 3 Whether a declaration should issue that the suit plots have passed by prescription and belong to the Plaintiff.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiff had demonstrated exclusive and uninterrupted possession of the suit properties for more than 12 years, with no challenge from the registered owner or any other party. The Plaintiff's evidence was uncontroverted, and the court was satisfied that the requirements for adverse possession under the Limitation of Actions Act had been met. Consequently, the court declared the Plaintiff the owner of Plot Nos 7103/1/MN and 7104/1/MN by virtue of adverse possession and ordered that the properties be registered in his name.
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's claim for adverse possession allowed; Plaintiff declared owner of the suit properties; no order as to costs.
Orders
- The Plaintiff is declared the owner of Plot No. 7103/1/MN and Plot No. 7104/1/MN by virtue of adverse possession.
- The two properties shall be registered in the name of the Plaintiff.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
IN THE MATTER OF PLOT NO. 7103/1/MN
AND
IN THE MATER OF LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT CAP 22 OF THE LAWS OF KENYA
BETWEEN
JOSEPH KARISA PONDA ………..............………………….. PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
V E R S U S
JUKANA (K) LTD ………………………………………… DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. In the Originating Summons dated 2nd December 2011 the Plaintiff has asked the Court to determine the following questions-
(a)Whether the Applicant/Plaintiff is a beneficiary by virtue of adverse possession of Plot No. 7103/1/MN and Plot No. 7104/1/MN which he is in occupation thereof.
(b)Whether the Applicant/Plaintiff is entitled by virtue of adverse possession to be registered as the owner of Plot No. 7103/1/MN and Plot No. 7104/1/MN.
(c)If the answer to (a) & (b) above is in the affirmative, a declaration do issue that Plot No. 7103/1/MN and Plot No. 7104/1/MN have passed by prescription and belong to the Plaintiff and they be registered in his name.
2. Through an application dated 16th March 2012 the Plaintiff sought an order to effect service of the Originating Summons by way of Registered Post. Upon considering the application, the Court granted the request for substituted service but ordered that it be effected by way of advertisement in the “Daily Nation” or the “Standard” Newspapers on any working day.
3. The Summons were served by way of advertisement in the Daily Nation of Monday June 18, 2012 and an affidavit of service filed on 10th July 2012. The prescribed time lapsed without any appearance by the Defendant and so on 30th July 2012 the Plaintiff took the witness stand to prove his claim by way of viva voce evidence.
4. That evidence was brief. The Plaintiff says that he has resided on Plot Nos 7103 & 7104/1/MN since 1996 having been allowed entry by an old man who left soon thereafter and never returned. From then on no one has come forward to lay a claim on the property.
5. The Plaintiff showed to this Court pictures of a mud house which he claimed belongs to him and which stand on the plots. In the list of documents filed by the Plaintiff copies of Certificate of Title to the suit properties and Certificates of Postal Searches carried out on 9th December 2011. These show that even on dates after the summons had been filed, the properties were registered in the name of the Defendant.
6. The Plaintiff gave further evidence that he has been paying the rates to the Council. What however was produced in Court were receipts for payments made in respect to rates clearance Certificates for the properties.
7. This Court has heard the Plaintiff and considered the exhibits produced in support of his case. That evidence is uncontraverted. This Court does believe this evidence and finds that the Plaintiff has had exclusive and uninterrupted possession of the suitland for more than 12 years and has proved his claim for adverse possession on a balance of probabilities. For this reason the Court does hereby declare that the Plaintiff is the owner of Plots No. 7103/1/MN/ and Plot No. 7104/1/MN having acquired that ownership by way of adverse possession. The two properties shall be registered in the names of the Plaintiff.
There shall be no order on costs. Orders accordingly.
Dated and delivered at Mombasa this 30th day of August, 2012.
F. TUIYOTT
JUDGE
Dated and delivered in open court in the presence of:-
Oduor for the Applicant
No appearance for the Respondent
Court clerk - Moriasi
F. TUIYOTT
JUDGE