https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3514

Lemarkat & 2 others v Commissioner of Lands & 9 others (Environment and Land Petition 6 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 3514 (KLR) (4 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 3514 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Environment and Land Court at Nyandarua Environment and Land Petition 6 of 2023 JM Kamau, J June 4, 2026 Between Richard Lemarkat & 2 others Petitioner and The Commissioner of Lands & 9 others Respondent Ruling 1.The suit in this Petition was commenced on 25/5/2016 where a constitutional petition was filed by the Petitioners for the following orders: -1.An order to permanently restrain the Respondents from alienating, registering, selling and/or in any manner whatsoever interfering with all that parcel of land known as Ndoto adjudication section Samburu County.2.An order prohibiting the Respondents from registering the aforesaid land in the name of Lessepen Group Ranch.3.An order cancelling the entire adjudication process in Ndoto adjudication section, Samburu County.4.An order for fresh adjudication section in operating and with the involvement of residents of Lkotical sub-location Samburu County.5.An order for registration of land with Lkotoical Sub-Location Ndoto adjudication section in the name of individual residents of Lkotical sub-location and/or in the name of the group Ranch of their choice.6.An order restraining the 10th Respondent , Kenya Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd, its servants or agents from disbursing compensation due to land owners of Ndoto adjudication section Samburu County to Lesspan Group Ranch.7.An order directing the 10th Respondent , M/S Kenya Electricity Transmission Co Ltd to dispense compensation due to land owners of Lkotical sub-location and/or to Group Ranch of their choice.8.Such other of further orders as this Court may deem fit and expedient to grant.9.Costs of the Petition. 2.The Petition was supported by a Affidavit sworn on even date by the 3 Petitioners Miherah who deponed that in 1978, the land adjudication officer, Samburu District declared Ndoto Location, Samburu County as an adjudication section within the province of section 5 of Land Adjudication Act, Cap 284 Laws of Kenya. Ndoto adjudication section comprises:-a.Arsimb.Nguronitc.Illaritd.Serene.Lesirkanf.Lodilag.Latakwenyh.Loikumkumi.Lkotikal. 3.All same Llotikal are within Ndoto ward. The last one is within Nyiro ward. They deponed that the 9thRespondent abused his position as the then chairman of the Land Committee, Samburu County Assembly to discriminate against residents of Lkotical sub-location on the basis they were not residents of his ward and consisted the Lessepan Group Ranch, residents of Ndoto ward to annex the neighbouring Lkotikal sub-location and to dispose the residents of their lad and that the latter , Lkotikal sub-location and its residents were left out in the process of adjudication and were disposable and left landless. 4.The 10th Respondent was said to be in the process of putting up power transmission lines between Marsabit County through Samburu, Laikipia, Nyandarua and Nakuru Counties all the way to Mai Mahiu and a compensation of Ksh 25,000,000/- was payable to the land owners of Ndoto adjudication section which =in this case is Lessepen Group Ranch – the 8th Respondent to the exclusion of the resident of Lkotoikal sub-location being over 300 household who stood to lose their land and livelihood. 5.The map for Ndoto adjudication section and the entire adjudication process was shrouded in secrecy. They were denied access to the register of Ndoto and Section as well and could therefore not appeal to the Minister or lodge any objection with the relevant adjudication committee or arbitration Board under the Adjudication Act. 6.On 13/1/2017 the Petitioners and the 10th Respondent filed a consent dated 13/1/2017 in the following terms.1.The 10th Respondent shall deposit a sum of Kshs 25,462,500/- in a joint interest earning Account in the names of Munga Kibanya & Co Advocates and Murimi Mbogo & Muchela Advocates within 30 days of the filing of the Consent. i.e with effect from 13/1/2017.2.Upon the fulfillment of (1) above, the Petitioners shall allow the 10th Respondent unhindered access to build a power transmission line traversing the land the subject of this Petition within the Lkotikal sub-county, Samburu County pending the Hearing and determination of this Petition.3.The Money in the Account stated as I above to remain held at the bank pending further orders of the Court.4.Each party be at liberty to apply. 7.On 18/12/2017 the firm of Waichungo Martin & Co Advocates sought for leave to be included as a signatory to the joint bank Account on behalf of the 8th Respondent which Application was allowed on 15/1/20018 but the 8th Respondents was restrained and prohibited from ...........................and/or otherwise interfering with the construction of power transmission line on the suit land by the 10th Respondent following the hearing and determination of the Petition. 8.The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th,5th,6th and 7th Respondents opposed the Petition through grounds of Opposition dated 12/3/2018 on the grounds that:-1.The Petitioners had no power to file the Petition on behalf of 135 residents of Lkotikal location who had not signed the authority to sue.2.That the Petition has not met the threshold set out in Anarita Kiremi case since the Petitioners had not specified the specific Articles they allege to have been infringed and the manner in which they were infringed. 9.They prayed the Petition be dismissed with costs. On 15/11/2019 Langaal Jacob Lekurkkan filed a further Affidavit in support of the Petition same sworn on 10/11/2018 where he deponed to have the chief of Ndoto Nyiro Location between 1974 and 1992 where he said that due to extraneous interests mostly .............exploration of minerals, there had been various irregular attempts to annex Lkotikal sub-location larger Ewaso Rongai location as part of Ndoto Location ( Ndoto ward and Ndoto adjudication area, yet a further Affidavit was sworn on 10/12/2018 by the 1st Petitioner deponing that Nyiro ward was yet to be adjudicated but Lkotikal with Nyiro ward was entitled to compensation but that 8th Respondent sought to receive compensation from the 10th respondent, compensation meant for Lkotikal sub-location. 10.On 16/11/2023 the Court gave its Judgment in favour of the Petitioners as follows.1.A declaration is hereby made that the residents of Lkotikal sub-location are entitled on a prorate basis to a share of the compensation package of Kshs 25,462,500/= tendered by the 10th Respondent for the area of 339.5 Acres affected by the power transmission line.2.The 10th Respondent is hereby directed to segregate the said area of 339.5 Acres by indicating the area falling within the 8th Respondent’s adjudicated area in Ndoto adjudication section using the official boundaries of Ndoto adjudication section held by the Director of Land Adjudication & Settlement as amended vide the Notice dated 28/9/1978. The latter is hereby directed to co-operate and supply the necessary maps, records and Documents to the 10th respondent for that purpose.3.The 10th Respondent shall file the necessary report in Court within 45 days from the date hereof and serve a copy thereof upon all Advocates who participated in the proceedings.4.The matter shall be mentioned on 17/1/2024 for the Court to undertake the apportionment on a pro rata basis.5.The rest of the prayers sought in the Petition are hereby declined.6.Each party to bear its own costs of the proceedings. 11.On 26/2/2024 the 8th Respondent filed a Notice of Appeal against the Judgment. 12.On 9/3/2024 filed a Court order by the 3 firms of Advocates on behalf of the ..................... the 8th Respondent and the 10th Respondent and which was adopted by the Court on 23/4/2024. 13.The Branch manager NCBA Bank Limited Nakuru Branch shall remit funds held in joint Accounta.(i)70% of Kshs 12,996,492.86 plus accrued interest thereof shall be fixed in a joint interest earning account in the joint names of Murimi,mbago & Muchela Advocates And Munga Kibanga & Co Advocates pending the registration s of the Petitioners as a community under the Community Land Act 2016.(ii)30% of Kshs 12,996,492.86 plus accrued interest thereof shall be transferred to:-Account Name: Murimi Mbago & Muchela AdvocatesAccount No: 625xxxxx18Bank Name: NCBA BankBranch Code: 000Swift Code: CBAFKENXBank Code: 07As legal feesb.Kshs 10,126,875 plus accrued interest shall be transferred to:-Account Name: Waichungo Martin & Co AdvocatesAccount No: 016xxxxxxxxx33Bank Name: Equity Bankc.Kshs 2,339,061.63 plus accrued interest thereon shall be transferred to:-Account Name: Munga Kibanga & Co AdvocatesAccount No: 673xxxxx17Bank Name: NCBA BankBranch Name: Merud.(i)42% of Kshs 11,815,550.00 plus accrued interest thereof shall be fixed in a joint interest earning account in the joint names of Murimi,mbago & Muchela Advocates And Munga Kibanga & Co Advocates pending the registration of the Petitioners as a community under the community Land Act 2016.(ii)40% of Kshs 11,815,550.00 plus accrued interest thereof shall be deposited in a joint account in the joint names of M/S Murimi,mbago & Muchela Advocates And Waichungo Martin & Co Advocates at NCBA Bank – Nakuru Branch as security pending the hearing and determination of intended Appeal by the 8th Respondent in the Court of Appeal respecting the issue of compensation for vegetation.(iii)18% of Kshs 11,815,550.00 plus accrued interest thereof shall be deposited in the following account:-Account Name: Murimi Mbago & Muchela AdvocatesAccount No: 625xxxxx18Bank Name: NCBA BankBranch Code: 000Swift Code: CBAFKENXBank Code: 07As legal feese.The sums referred in a (i0 and d(i0 shall be transferred to the Petitioners immediately the Petitioners are registered as a community under the Community Land Act 2016.f.The sums referred to d (ii) shall abide the outcome of the intended Appeal in the Court of Appeal preferred by the 8th Respondent.g.The Petitioners’ Application dated 19th February, 2024, the 8th Respoindent’s Application dated 28th February, 2024 and the 10th Respondent’s application dated 21st February, 2024 be marked as settled.h.That all other contents of the Court orders dated 15th February, 2024 shall remain in force for all intents and purposes.i.The Petitioners and the 6th Respondent shall through their authorized oficials execute way-leave agreements in respect of their respective parcels of land in favour of the 10th Respondent within 21 days from the date of filing this Consent.j.The authorized officials of the pEtitioners and the 8th Respondent shall execute personal indemnities in respect of the easements in favour of the 10th Respondent herein.k.The 8th Respondent shall provide the 10th Respondent with the following Documents for registration of the easement in favour of the 10th Respondent within 21 days from the date of filing this Consent.a.ID and KRA PIN for 2 officials.b.Copy of Certificate of registration of the 8th Respondent.c.PIN Certificate of the 8th Respondent.d.Passport photos of the officials of the 8th Respondent.e.Search confirming the officials of the 8th Respondent.l.The 8th Respondent shall through their Advocates within 21 days of filing of this Consent release the original Title Deed for purposes of registration of the easement herein to the 10th Respondent through the 10th Respondent’s Advocate upon the 10th Respondent’s Advocate giving the requisite professional undertaking to the 8th Respondent’s Advocates for the return of the said original Title in good order immediately upon registration of the easement herein. 14.On 21/2/2026, the 8th Respondent filed an Application dated 29/1/2026 for an order that the 10th Respondent KETRACO to be compelled to release the original Title Deed for L.R Section Ndoto A Location 17 to the 8th Respondent unconditionally for reasons that:-1.Vide the Court order of 19/3/2024 the 8th Respondent through its officials were to execute wayleave agreements in respect of L.R No. Section Ndoto A Location 17 in favour of KETRACO.2.The 8TH Respondent executed a discharge and indemnity, a community land wayleaves agreement and a Grant of easement of L.R No. section Ndoto a location 17 IN June, 2024 as per the consent.3.The Documents and the original Title Deed for the land were forwarded to Munga Kibanya & Co Advocates for the 10th Respondent on 14/6/2024 and the same were acknowledged vide a letter dated 25/7/2024.4.In the letter dated 25/7/2024, the 10th Respondent’s Advocates indicated they were unable to register the wayleave due to discrepancies of the names appearing in the Title Deed and in the 8th Respondents Certificate of registration and PIN Certificate.5.The Applicants representative swore an Affidavit dated 2/8/2024 explaining the discrepancies in the names.6.Vide letter dated 9/4/2025, the 10th Respondent requested for a rectification on the name appearing in the Title Deed to read lessepen Group Ranch to tally the Certificate of registration and PIN Certificate.7.In the Reply dated 10/4/2025, the Applicants representative requested the 10th Respondent to retain the original Title Deed to them to enable them effect the rectification sought.8.To date the original Title Deed is yet to be returned to them despite several correspondences to that effect.9.The continued withholding of the original Title Deed for the suit land has curtailed the Applicants’ dealings on the suit land and their members are demanding for the return of the Title Deed. 15.These facts are on the face of the above Application and on the Affidavit in support by David Lempesie a representative of the 5th Respondent sworn on even date. 16.In the Replying Affidavit sworn on 17/3/2026 by the one Isaack O.Okeyo Legal Officer of the 10th Respondent, who said he was aware that upon the Court order of 19/3/2024 being adopted by the Court, the 8th Respondent was supposed to release the original Title Deed to the 10th Respondent for purposes of the registration of an easement in favour of KETRACO and which was forwarded to the 10th Respondent for the same but that there was a discrepancy in the names of the registered proprietor appearing in various ownership documents in the Certificate of Incorporation versus PIN Certificate. This makes it difficult for the Land Registrar to process the mandated registration of the easement in favour of the 10th Respondent. The 10th Respondent explains that she is not opposed to the rectification of the Title Deed in order to correct the discrepancy in the name of the registered proprietor and that the 8th Respondent should issue a time-bound Professional undertaking before the rectification of the Title Deed. 17.I asked the parties herein to file their written Submissions to enable me decide on the matter. 18.I feel that this is not a matter that requires the intervention of the Court under this Petition. All that the 8th Respondent need to do is ask the Land Registrar to rectify the Title Deed in question. 19.The law is clear on what should be done in order to rectify the Title Deed under Order 80 of the Land Registration Act. This as I have said above is not a consequential proceeding to the Judgment. RULING READ DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NYANDARUA THIS 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026.MUGO KAMAUJUDGEIn the Presence of: -Court Assistant: Samson.Petitioner’s Counsel: Mr. MwendaRespondent’s Counsel: Mr. Waichungo for 8th Respondent.Mr. Omwega for the 10th Respondent.