[2019] KEELC 2320 (KLR)
Although the strict legal position is that compensation for developments is not payable where a contract of sale of land is rescinded without Land Control Board consent, the court exercised discretion in the interest of the parties' negotiations. Given the significant variance between the plaintiff's and defendants'...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 2320 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Joseph Kipkurui Sanga; Defendant: Julius Kipngetich Kosgei; Defendant: Joshua Kiprugut Koskei
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 716 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Dispute / Ruling After Hearing and Consideration of Valuation Reports
- Outcome
- Compensation awarded for land and developments at Kshs. 600,000 as a negotiated middle ground.
- Legal Topics
- Valuation of Land, Compensation for Developments, Rescission of Sale Agreement
- 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 Kipkurui Sanga
Plaintiff
Julius Kipngetich Kosgei
Defendant
Joshua Kiprugut Koskei
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Dispute / Ruling After Hearing and Consideration of Valuation Reports
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the parties are entitled to compensation for developments on the suit land upon rescission of the sale agreement.
- 2 What is the appropriate value to be awarded for the developments and land given the conflicting valuation reports.
Ratio Decidendi
Although the strict legal position is that compensation for developments is not payable where a contract of sale of land is rescinded without Land Control Board consent, the court exercised discretion in the interest of the parties' negotiations. Given the significant variance between the plaintiff's and defendants' valuation reports (Kshs. 530,000 and Kshs. 850,000 respectively), and considering the dates of the reports, the court determined that a fair and equitable resolution was to award a middle-ground figure of Kshs. 600,000. This amount was deemed to cater for both parties' interests and reflect the spirit of their negotiations, despite the lack of detailed information on the...
Court Disposition
Compensation awarded for land and developments at Kshs. 600,000 as a negotiated middle ground.
Orders
- The plaintiff and defendants are awarded a total sum of Kshs. 600,000 as compensation for the land and developments.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT ELDORET
ELC NO. 716 OF 2012
JOSEPH KIPKURUI SANGA....................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JULIUS KIPNGETICH KOSGEI...1ST DEFENDANT
JOSHUA KIPRUGUT KOSKEI.....2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
This matter proceeded for full hearing whereby the Plaintiff and the defendants gave evidence on 5th April, 2018. Parties agreed to try an out of court settlement and they requested for time to negotiate. They latter agreed to file valuation reports in respect of the suit land and the developments thereon.
Two valuation reports were filed but the figures were varying therefore Counsel urged the court to peruse the reports and make a determination.
The 1st valuation report dated 15th March, 2019 by the Plaintiff indicates a figure of Kshs.530,000/= made up as follows;-
Land Kshs.400,000/=
Semi-permanent houses Kshs. 90,000/=
Barbed wire fence Kshs. 20,000=
Assorted trees Kshs. 20,000/=
TOTAL = Kshs. 530,000/=
The 2nd Valuation Report by the Defendant dated 21st September, 2017 indicates a figure of Kshs.850,000/= made up as follows:-
La nd Kshs. 650,000/=
Houses Kshs. 120,000/=
Assorted trees Kshs. 50,000=
Fence Kshs. 30,000/=
TOTAL = Kshs. 850,000/=
I notice from the Photos provided in the valuation reports that the houses are grass thatched and mud walled. The two corrugated iron sheets houses are not sizeable. One looks like it was constructed recently while the matter was pending in court.
The valuation reports do not also mention the type of assorted trees, their age and how many they are.
It is also surprising that there is a big variance in the figures by the valuers. In strict sense, a party should not pay for developments if a contract of sale of land is rescinded and more so if a Land Control Board consent is not sought and obtained but in the interest of the spirit of negotiations by the parties, I will allow them to do so and award a figure of Kshs.600,000/= taking into account that the valuation by the defendant was done in 2017 and the Plaintiff’s in 2019. This is the middle ground to cater for both interests.
Dated and delivered at Eldoret on this 25th day of July, 2019.
M. A. ODENY
JUDGE
RULING READ IN OPEN COURT in the presence of Mr.Nyachiro for Defendant and in the absence of Mr.Mutai
Mr.Mwelem – court Assistant