[2020] KEELC 1932 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had established ownership of the disputed one acre portion of Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/263 through a prior decree. The defendant, having been served but failing to appear or defend, did not contest the plaintiff's evidence. The court accepted the plaintiff's testimony and documentary...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 1932 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Josephat Thuo Githachuri; Defendant: Joseph Kibui Mwithiga
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 123 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment for the plaintiff; suit allowed as prayed with modifications on damages.
- Judges
- BM Eboso
- Legal Topics
- Trespass to Land, Mandatory Injunction, General Damages, Land Ownership Disputes
- 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
Josephat Thuo Githachuri
Plaintiff
Joseph Kibui Mwithiga
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant trespassed onto the plaintiff's parcel of land described as Parts I and J on LR No Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/263.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a mandatory order for demolition of the defendant's structures.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had established ownership of the disputed one acre portion of Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/263 through a prior decree. The defendant, having been served but failing to appear or defend, did not contest the plaintiff's evidence. The court accepted the plaintiff's testimony and documentary evidence showing trespass by the defendant, including photographs and official documents. The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to a permanent injunction to restrain further trespass, a mandatory order for demolition of the defendant's structures, and nominal general damages for trespass. The court declined to award the full amount of general damages sought due to lack...
Court Disposition
Judgment for the plaintiff; suit allowed as prayed with modifications on damages.
Orders
- A permanent injunction restraining the defendant and his agents from trespassing on the plaintiff’s one acre portion of Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/263 (Parts I and J).
- A mandatory order requiring the defendant to demolish his structures on the said property within 30 days; in default, the plaintiff may demolish them.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NAIROBI
ELC SUIT NO. 123 OF 2017
JOSEPHAT THUO GITHACHURI...............................................PLAINTIFF
=VERSUS=
JOSEPH KIBUI MWITHIGA.....................................................DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
1. Through a plaint dated 20/2/2017, the plaintiff instituted this suit against the defendant seeking the following orders:
a) A mandatory injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing onto the plaintiff’s parcel of land described as I & J on land parcel LR No Dagoretti/ Ruthimitu/263.
b) An order that the defendant demolishes his structures on the land and restores the land to its original status.
c) General damages for trespass and nuisance.
d) Costs of the suit.
2. The plaintiff’s case is that he is the registered owner of one acre designated as Parts I and J being a portion of all that parcel of land known as Land Title Number Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/263 (the suit property). He acquired the suit property through orders of adverse possession in Nairobi HCCC No 2364 of 1999 (OS). The defendant trespassed on the suit property and started to develop it. Despite several attempts to stop him from trespassing on the land, the defendant continued with the acts of trespass. The defendant’s activities have devalued the plaintiff’s land. Consequently, the plaintiff seeks the above orders.
3. The defendant did not enter appearance or file a defence to the suit. He was served through the Standard Newspaper on 9/10/2019.
4. The plaintiff testified on 7/11/2019 as PW1. He adopted his written statement dated 8/8/2011 as his sworn evidence-in-chief. His evidence was that, he was the legal owner of one acre designated as Parts I and J, being part of Land Title Number Dagoretti/ Ruthimitu/263 pursuant to a decree issued in Nairobi HCCC No 2364 of 1999. He was in the process of excising his one acre portion of land when the defendant trespassed onto the said portion, erected a fence would it and laid a foundation for a building. The defendant was not a party in Nairobi HCCC No 2364 of 1999 and therefore he had no interest in the suit property. He contended that the defendant should be restrained from trespassing onto the suit property. He added that he was entitled to general damages and costs. He produced a bundle of 5 documents which included: (i) Decree in HCCC No 2364 of 1999 (OS); (ii) Subdivision plan for Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/263; (iii) amended notice of motion in HCCC No 2364 of 1999 (OS); Official Search dated 9/2/2017;(iv) and Photographs showing the defendant’s activities on the suit land.
5. The plaintiff filed written submissions on 13/12/2019 through the firm of Masore Nyangau & Company Advocates. Counsel submitted that the plaintiff had proved his case against the defendant and was, therefore, entitled to the prayers sought. Counsel submitted that an award of Kshs 2,000,000 in general damages was reasonable for the trespass. Reliance was placed on the case of John Chumia Nganga v The Attorney General & another, Thika ELC No 264 of 2017.
6. I have considered the pleadings, evidence and submissions placed before the court. This suit is undefended. The defendant was said to have been personally served. The court directed that he be further served through a notice in either the daily Nation or the Standard Newspaper. He was subsequently served through a notice published in the Standard Newspaper Edition of 9/10/2019.
7. The plaintiff’s case is that a decree was issued in Nairobi HCCC Number 2364 of 1999 (OS) in which he was awarded one acre out of land Title Number Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/263. In January 2017, the defendant trespassed onto the said portion of the land, erected a fence round it and started laying a foundation for a building. The plaintiff placed before court photographs depicting features of the alleged acts of trespass.
8. The court has considered the totality of the evidential materials placed before it. In the absence of a defence and controverting evidence, the court is satisfied that the plaintiff has proved his case against the defendant on a balance of probabilities. I will grant the plaintiff prayers (a), (b) and (c) as prayed.
9. Counsel for the plaintiff urged the court to grant the plaintiff general damages of Kshs 2,000,000. No evidence was led to assist the court assess general damages. The alleged trespass affected one acre piece of land in Dagoretti. There is no evidence to suggest that the trespass continued after the court issued a temporary restraining order in February 2017. In the circumstances, I will award the plaintiff nominal general damages of Kshs 1,000,000 (One Million) for the trespass.
10. In light of the foregoing, I make the following disposal orders:
a) A permanent injunction is hereby issued restraining the defendant together with his agents/servants against trespassing on the plaintiff’s one acre portion of Land Parcel Number Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/263 described as Parts I and J as decreed in Nairobi HCCC No 2364 of 1994 (OS).
b) A mandatory order is hereby issued requiring the defendant to demolish his structures erected on the said property within 30 days. In default, the plaintiff shall be at liberty to demolish the structures.
c) The Officer Commanding the area Police Station shall ensure observance of law and order during the demolition.
d) The plaintiff is awarded nominal general damages in the sum of Kshs 1,000,000 against the defendant
e) The defendant shall bear costs of the suit.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI ON THIS 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2020.
B M EBOSO
JUDGE
In the presence of: -
June Nafula - Court Clerk