[2011] KEHC 3413 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs' claim for adverse possession had been dismissed and no appeal was preferred. The plaintiffs remained in occupation of the land without any legal basis. The defendants, as registered proprietors, were entitled to seek enforcement of their rights, including vacant possession. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 3413 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Mathew Cheruiyot; Plaintiff: Juliana Cheruiyot; Defendant: Annah Bwokeny; Defendant: Recho Sioror; Defendant: Annah Sioror
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 80 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Originating Summons / Post Judgment Application for Vacant Possession
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Plaintiffs ordered to appear and show cause why they should not give vacant possession. Costs to defendants.
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Vacant Possession, Enforcement of Judgment
- 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
Mathew Cheruiyot
Plaintiff
Juliana Cheruiyot
Plaintiff
Annah Bwokeny
Defendant
Recho Sioror
Defendant
Annah Sioror
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Post Judgment Application for Vacant Possession
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs should be compelled to give vacant possession of land title No. Kericho/Kaptatet/1439 to the defendants after dismissal of their adverse possession claim.
- 2 Whether the defendants are entitled to enforcement orders following the plaintiffs' continued occupation despite dismissal of suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs' claim for adverse possession had been dismissed and no appeal was preferred. The plaintiffs remained in occupation of the land without any legal basis. The defendants, as registered proprietors, were entitled to seek enforcement of their rights, including vacant possession. The plaintiffs did not oppose the application, and the court was satisfied that the defendants had established their entitlement to the orders sought. Accordingly, the court granted the application for the plaintiffs to show cause why they should not give vacant possession, and ordered costs against the plaintiffs.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Plaintiffs ordered to appear and show cause why they should not give vacant possession. Costs to defendants.
Orders
- Plaintiffs shall appear in court on 11/4/2011 to show cause why they should not give vacant possession of land title No. Kericho/Kaptatet/1439 to the defendants.
- Costs of the application to be borne by the plaintiffs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLICOF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KERICHO
CIVIL SUIT NO. 80 OF 2001 (O.S)
MATHEW CHERUIYOT……….......……………………………………1ST PLAINTIFF
JULIANA CHERUIYOT………............………………………………... 2ND PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ANNAH BWOKENY…………………...…...........................................1ST DEFENDANT
RECHO SIOROR………………………..……………………………2ND DEFENDANT
ANNAH SIOROR……………………...………………………………3RD DEFENDANT
RULING
The Plaintiffs, Messrs Mathew Cheruiyot and Juliana Cheruiyot, had filed suit by way of Originating Summons on 15th October 2001 seeking declarations as to whether their deceased father, Cheruiyot Arap Tele had been in possession and occupation of the Land title No. Kericho/Kaptatet/1439 adversely to the title of the registered proprietor. The suit was dismissed on 23rd October 2009. They are still in possession of the land. But they did not appeal against the judgment of the Court.
The Defendants now seek orders that the Plaintiffs show cause why they should not give vacant possession of the land to the Defendants.
As the Plaintiffs did not oppose the application by filing either grounds of opposition or a replying affidavit, the Defendants’ application proceeded to hearing without opposition.
Mr. N. O. Migiro, learned Counsel for the Defendants, urged the court to allow the application and grant the orders sought.
I have duly perused the application and considered the submission by Mr. Migiro. I am satisfied that the Defendants are entitled to the orders they seek. Accordingly, I allow the application and grant the orders sought.
I also order that the Plaintiffs shall appear in this Court on 11/4/2011 to show cause why they should not give vacant possession of the suit land to the Defendants.
The costs of this application shall be borne by the Plaintiffs.
DATEDat KERICHO this 16th March Day of March, 2011
G B M KARIUKI, SC
RESIDENT JUDGE
COUNSEL APPEARING
Mr. N.M. Migiro, Advocate, for the Applicants
Mr. Motanya, Advocate, for Mr. W. R. Kiprono, Advocate, for Respondents
Mr. Bett, Court clerk