[2018] KEELC 645 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 645 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had produced sufficient documentary evidence to prove ownership of the suit land, including the original title deed and supporting documents. The defendants, having been duly served, failed to enter appearance or defend the suit. The court held that the plaintiff had established...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 645 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Michael Wafula; Defendant: David Ongeri Angweyi; Defendant: Anori Barasa Manyorori; Defendant: Francis Ashoya Anyango; Defendant: Fred Wafula Francis
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kitale
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 68 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff. Eviction order granted. Costs awarded to the plaintiff.
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Eviction, Title to Land, Possession, Uncontested Claim
Source Language
en
Land and Property Eviction Title to Land Possession Uncontested Claim

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Wafula

Plaintiff

David Ongeri Angweyi

Defendant

Anori Barasa Manyorori

Defendant

Francis Ashoya Anyango

Defendant

Fred Wafula Francis

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is the lawful owner of land parcel Kiminini/Matunda Block 10/Matunda/37.
  2. 2 Whether the defendants are unlawfully occupying the suit land and should be evicted.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs of the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had produced sufficient documentary evidence to prove ownership of the suit land, including the original title deed and supporting documents. The defendants, having been duly served, failed to enter appearance or defend the suit. The court held that the plaintiff had established his case on a balance of probabilities and was entitled to the orders sought. The absence of opposition and the clear evidence of ownership justified the grant of eviction orders and costs against the defendants.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff. Eviction order granted. Costs awarded to the plaintiff.

Orders

  • The defendants, their families, servants, agents, or any other persons acting or claiming interest through them shall remove themselves and their property from land parcel Kiminini/Matunda Block 10/Matunda/37 at their own cost, failing which they shall be forcibly evicted.
  • The defendants shall bear the costs of the suit.