[2014] KEHC 2260 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 2260 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs and their ancestors had occupied the suit land since the 1930s and that there was no evidence of compensation for any alleged compulsory acquisition by the government. The subdivision of the original plot into two separate plots was done without the plaintiffs' knowledge or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 2260 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mohamed Kweya Ojuok; Plaintiff: Abisai Orina Omolo; Plaintiff: Nora Kombo Toloi; Plaintiff: Selfa Indakwa Anangwe; Plaintiff: Abubakar Abdi Biro; Plaintiff: Jacob Ratande Mukabana; Plaintiff: Tawakal Abdulrazak Burhan; Defendant: Mumias Municipality Council; Defendant: Kakamega County Council
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 31 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Land and Environment Case / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs. Subdivisions nullified. Land to revert to original plot and be registered in plaintiffs' names in trust for all inhabitants. Each party to bear own costs.
Judges
SJ Chitembwe
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Land Registration, Nullification of Title, Right to Property
Source Language
en
Land and Property Compulsory Acquisition Land Registration Nullification of Title Right to Property

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohamed Kweya Ojuok

Plaintiff

Abisai Orina Omolo

Plaintiff

Nora Kombo Toloi

Plaintiff

Selfa Indakwa Anangwe

Plaintiff

Abubakar Abdi Biro

Plaintiff

Jacob Ratande Mukabana

Plaintiff

Tawakal Abdulrazak Burhan

Plaintiff

Mumias Municipality Council

Defendant

Kakamega County Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Environment Case / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be recognized as the lawful owners of plot number SOUTH WANGA/EKERO/772.
  2. 2 Whether the subdivision of the original plot into SOUTH WANGA/EKERO/2363 and 2364 was lawful.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs were compensated for compulsory acquisition, if any.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs and their ancestors had occupied the suit land since the 1930s and that there was no evidence of compensation for any alleged compulsory acquisition by the government. The subdivision of the original plot into two separate plots was done without the plaintiffs' knowledge or consent. The court held that the plaintiffs had proved their case on a balance of probabilities and were entitled to recognition as lawful owners. The court nullified the subdivisions, revoked the titles for the subdivided plots, and ordered that the land revert to its original plot number and be registered in the names of the plaintiffs in trust for themselves and the other...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs. Subdivisions nullified. Land to revert to original plot and be registered in plaintiffs' names in trust for all inhabitants. Each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • The subdivision of plot number SOUTH WANGA/EKERO/772 into plot numbers SOUTH WANGA/EKERO/2363 and 2364 is nullified.
  • The titles for plot numbers SOUTH WANGA/EKERO/2363 and 2364 are revoked.