[2010] KEHC 2799 (KLR)
The court found that the Embu District Land Disputes Tribunal exceeded its statutory jurisdiction by making determinations on ownership of registered land, ordering specific performance, and directing the court's Executive Officer to sign transfer documents. Section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act No.18 of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 2799 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Mbogo Mwaniki; Respondent: Lucy Njoki Njuki; Respondent: Chairman, Embu District Land Dispute Tribunal
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application 14 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Certiorari
- Outcome
- application allowed; tribunal award and judgment quashed
- Judges
- J Karanja
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of Tribunals, Certiorari, Registered Land Disputes, Specific Performance, Ultra Vires Actions
- 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 Mbogo Mwaniki
Applicant
Lucy Njoki Njuki
Respondent
Chairman, Embu District Land Dispute Tribunal
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Certiorari
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Embu District Land Disputes Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine ownership of registered land.
- 2 Whether the Tribunal could order specific performance and direct the Executive Officer to sign transfer documents.
- 3 Whether the Tribunal's award was ultra vires its statutory mandate.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Embu District Land Disputes Tribunal exceeded its statutory jurisdiction by making determinations on ownership of registered land, ordering specific performance, and directing the court's Executive Officer to sign transfer documents. Section 3(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act No.18 of 1991 does not confer such powers on the Tribunal. As a result, the Tribunal's award and the judgment adopting it were ultra vires and must be quashed by an order of certiorari. The court further held that, although the 2nd respondent had a meritorious claim, she filed it before the wrong forum, and thus the proper recourse is to file suit before a court of competent jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
application allowed; tribunal award and judgment quashed
Orders
- The award of the Embu District Land Disputes Tribunal and the judgment of the court adopting the same are called into this court and are hereby quashed.
- Each party to bear their own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT EMBU
Miscellaneous
Civil Application 14 of 2009
JOSEPH MBOGO MWANIKI……………………………………………APPLICANT
VERSUS
LUCY NJOKI NJUKI……………………………………………..1ST RESPONDENT
THECHAIRMANEMBUDISTRICTLAND
DISPUTE TRIBUNAL…………………………………………..2ND RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
Leave to file an application for orders of certiorari was granted by this court on 29/6/2009. The notice of motion was then filed on 6/7/2009. The ex-parte applicant prays that this honourable court issues an order of certiorari to remove into this court the proceedings and order of the Embu District Land Disputes Tribunal No.25 of 2008 and award No.40 of 2008filed in the Senior Principal Magistrate Court at Embu for purposes of quashing.The application is basically premised on the issue of lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Tribunal.In its award, the Tribunal ordered that the Land Registrar should issue the 2nd Respondent with a Title deed for the plot she had bought from the exparte applicant. It further ordered specific performance in that it gave orders that Lucy deposits the balance of the purchase price of Kshs.29,000 in court for the owner to collect.It also gave orders that the executive officer signs all the documents to effect the said transfer.
Clearly, the tribunal has no such powers.It cannot decide on issues of ownership of registered land.It cannot make orders of specific performance inorder to enforce a contract between -2 parties; nor does it have jurisdiction to direct the court’s Executive Officer to sign the forms or do anything else.All these orders were therefore outside the jurisdiction of the land Disputes Tribunal as conferred on it under Section 3 (1) of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act No.18 of 1991. Their award was therefore ultra vires their jurisdiction and it ought to be quashed.
In the circumstances, I allow this motion and order that the said award of the Land Disputes Tribunal and the Judgment of the Court adopting the same are called into this court and the same are hereby quashed.
But for the fact that the 2nd Respondent filed her matter before the wrong forum, she had a good case.I will not therefore penalize her by asking her to pay costs herein.There will therefore be an order that the ex-parte applicant bears his own costs of this case.
The 2nd respondent can still file her suit before a court of competent jurisdiction.
W. KARANJA
JUDGE
Delivered, dated and signed at Embu this…12……..day of May 2010.
In presence of:-