[2006] KEHC 181 (KLR)
The court held that the Meru South District Land Dispute Tribunal acted without jurisdiction in making a decision regarding the ownership and subdivision of registered land, as such authority is exclusively vested in the registered proprietor under the Registered Land Act Cap. 300. The Land Disputes Tribunals Act...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2006] KEHC 181 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: M’Chabara M’Ukabi; Respondent: The Chairman Meru South District Land Dispute Tribunal
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Miscellaneous Application 12 of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Orders of certiorari granted as prayed. Tribunal decision quashed.
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of Land Disputes Tribunal, Registered Land, Certiorari, Title Guarantee, Proprietorship, Judicial Review
- 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
M’Chabara M’Ukabi
Applicant
The Chairman Meru South District Land Dispute Tribunal
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Meru South District Land Dispute Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine ownership of registered land under the Registered Land Act.
- 2 Whether the decision of the Tribunal regarding subdivision and distribution of registered land was lawful.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the Meru South District Land Dispute Tribunal acted without jurisdiction in making a decision regarding the ownership and subdivision of registered land, as such authority is exclusively vested in the registered proprietor under the Registered Land Act Cap. 300. The Land Disputes Tribunals Act does not empower the Tribunal to adjudicate on matters of ownership of registered land. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision was null and void, and the application for certiorari was allowed, quashing the Tribunal's decision.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Orders of certiorari granted as prayed. Tribunal decision quashed.
Orders
- The decision of the Meru South District Land Dispute Tribunal is quashed.
- Orders of certiorari are granted as prayed in the application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT EMBU
Misc 12 of 2006
M’CHABARA M’UKABI………………….....................................………........………………..APPLICANT
VERSUS
THE CHAIRMAN MERU SOUTH DISTRICT LAND DISPUTE TRIBUNAL...........….RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
Notice of Motion dated 23/2/2006 seeks Orders of Certiorari to quash the decision of Meru South District Land Dispute Tribunal.
The application is brought under Law Reform Act Section 8 and 9 and Order 53 CPC. The subject matter is registered Land Karingani/ Ndagani/655. The decision of the tribunal was that he said land be subdivided and be distributed to the sons of the Exparte Applicant. The issue here is whether the Tribunal Land Jurisdiction to deal with the Exparte applicant i registered land and ownership thereof Registered Land under Registered Land Act Cap. 300 is held by proprietor whose title is guaranteed by the state. The dealings in registered land are in the hands of the registered proprietor. Act 18 of 1990 which established Land Disputes Tribunal does not authorize the Tribunal to decide on the issue of ownership of registered land.
I therefore find that the decision by Land Disputes Tribunal was without jurisdiction and the application is allowed and orders granted as prayed.
Dated 27th September, 2006.
J. N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE