[2021] KEELC 947 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 947 (KLR)

The court found that the consent judgment dated 28th March 2019 was clear and binding, requiring the defendants to transfer the suit property to the plaintiffs within 60 days of payment, which the plaintiffs had fulfilled. The defendants' failure to effect the transfer was not justified by the existence of caveats,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELC 947 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Joseph Ngaira Busiega; Plaintiff: George Mwangi Hiuhu; Defendant: Kimo Enterprises Limited; Defendant: John Kioi Karanja
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 488 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Enforce Consent Judgment and for Vesting Order
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
LC Komingoi
Legal Topics
Consent Judgment Enforcement, Vesting Order, Transfer of Land, Caveats on Title
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Consent Judgment Enforcement Vesting Order Transfer of Land Caveats on Title

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

Parties

Joseph Ngaira Busiega

Plaintiff

George Mwangi Hiuhu

Plaintiff

Kimo Enterprises Limited

Defendant

John Kioi Karanja

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Enforce Consent Judgment and for Vesting Order

  1. 1 Whether the consent judgment dated 28th March 2019 should be enforced by vesting order in favour of the plaintiffs.
  2. 2 Whether the Deputy Registrar should execute transfer documents for the suit property in favour of the 1st plaintiff.
  3. 3 Whether the Chief Land Registrar should process the 1st plaintiff's title documents regardless of the availability of the original title.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the consent judgment dated 28th March 2019 was clear and binding, requiring the defendants to transfer the suit property to the plaintiffs within 60 days of payment, which the plaintiffs had fulfilled. The defendants' failure to effect the transfer was not justified by the existence of caveats, particularly as one was lodged by the 1st plaintiff and the others were being addressed. The replying affidavit by the defendants was deemed to contain mere denials and did not adequately address the plaintiffs' claims. The court held that the plaintiffs were entitled to enforcement of the consent judgment, including issuance of a vesting order, execution of transfer documents...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • A vesting order is issued conferring the plaintiffs ownership of Plot Number A on the sub-division plan measuring approximately 0.4070 hectares of LR No 12661/29 (IR No 38998/1).
  • The Deputy Registrar is ordered to execute all necessary documents and instruments of transfer in respect of Plot No. A on LR No 12661/29 (IR No 38998/1) in favour of the 1st plaintiff.