[2018] KEELC 2178 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 2178 (KLR)

The Court found that the Plaintiffs' claim was time-barred under Section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act. The right of action accrued when the suit lands were registered in the names of persons other than the Plaintiffs' late father, specifically in 1995 and 1996. The statutory limitation period of twelve years...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 2178 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Julius Macharia Thuo; Plaintiff: Nancy Wangui Mugwe; Defendant: Pentecostal Evangelistic Fellowship of Kenya; Defendant: Grace Nyokabi Thuo; Defendant: Samuel Mbuthia Kamau; Defendant: The Land Registrar Murang'a District
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Muranga
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 385 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiffs' suit dismissed for being time-barred under the Limitation of Actions Act.
Judges
BC Koech
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Fraudulent Transfer, Title Registration, Estate Administration
Source Language
en
Land and Property Limitation of Actions Fraudulent Transfer Title Registration Estate Administration

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julius Macharia Thuo

Plaintiff

Nancy Wangui Mugwe

Plaintiff

Pentecostal Evangelistic Fellowship of Kenya

Defendant

Grace Nyokabi Thuo

Defendant

Samuel Mbuthia Kamau

Defendant

The Land Registrar Murang'a District

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claim of the Plaintiffs is barred by the Limitation of Actions Act.
  2. 2 Whether the titles issued to the Defendants are void and ought to be cancelled.
  3. 3 Whether the 3rd Defendant is a bona fide purchaser for value without notice.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the Plaintiffs' claim was time-barred under Section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act. The right of action accrued when the suit lands were registered in the names of persons other than the Plaintiffs' late father, specifically in 1995 and 1996. The statutory limitation period of twelve years expired in 2007 and 2008 for the respective parcels. Since the Plaintiffs filed the suit in 2013, their claim was already stale and the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain it. Consequently, the Plaintiffs' suit was dismissed on the basis of limitation, and it was unnecessary to consider the remaining issues regarding title validity or bona fide purchase.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' suit dismissed for being time-barred under the Limitation of Actions Act.

Orders

  • The Plaintiffs' claim is dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs of the suit.