[2018] KEELC 1613 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiff had performed its obligations under the Sale Agreement by paying the deposit, and the Defendant failed to transfer the land as agreed. The Defendant did not contest the Plaintiff's evidence. The Agreement expressly provided that in the event of default by the Defendant, all amounts...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 1613 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Mosica Properties Limited; Defendant: Moureen Ndunge Nzioka
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 428 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's claim allowed in full.
- Judges
- OA Angote
- Legal Topics
- Sale of Land, Breach of Contract, Specific Performance, Refund of Deposit
- 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
Mosica Properties Limited
Plaintiff
Moureen Ndunge Nzioka
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Defendant breached the Agreement of Sale by failing to transfer the land to the Plaintiff as agreed.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to a refund of the deposit and penalty as stipulated in the Agreement of Sale.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiff had performed its obligations under the Sale Agreement by paying the deposit, and the Defendant failed to transfer the land as agreed. The Defendant did not contest the Plaintiff's evidence. The Agreement expressly provided that in the event of default by the Defendant, all amounts paid by the Plaintiff were to be refunded within fourteen days, plus a penalty of 10% of the purchase price. There was no evidence of breach by the Plaintiff. The court enforced the terms of the Agreement, ordering the Defendant to refund the deposit and pay the contractual penalty, with interest and costs.
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's claim allowed in full.
Orders
- The Defendant to reimburse the Plaintiff a sum of Kshs. 9,000,000.
- The Defendant to pay to the Plaintiff a penalty of Kshs. 9,000,000 being 10% interest of the purchase price as provided for under Clause 13(a) of the Sale Agreement of 16th December, 2015.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT MACHAKOS
ELC. CASE NO. 428 OF 2017
MOSICA PROPERTIES LIMITED........................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MOUREEN NDUNGE NZIOKA..........................................DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
1. In the Plaint dated 18th October, 2017, the Plaintiff averred that vide an Agreement of Sale dated 16th December, 2015, the Defendant transferred to it a portion of land known as Donyo Sabuk/Komarock Block 1/48365 measuring 50 acres; that the Plaintiff was to pay to the Defendant Kshs. 1,800,000 per acre amounting to a total of Kshs. 90,000,000 for the 50 acres and that the Plaintiff made the requisite payment of Kshs. 9,000,000 being the 10% deposit.
2. The Plaintiff finally averred that it was a term of the contract that upon receiving the deposit, the Defendant was to sub-divide the land into two portions; that the Plaintiff was required to pay the balance of the purchase price on or before the completion date and that the Defendant has refused to complete the transaction.
3. The Plaintiff’s prayer is for a refund of Kshs. 9,000,000 plus the penalty stipulated under the Agreement of Sale. The Defendant did not enter appearance or file a Defence. The matter proceeded for hearing as an undefended claim.
4. The Plaintiff’s Director, PW1, informed the court that the Plaintiff entered into an Agreement with the Defendant to purchase a portion of the suit property measuring 50 acres; that it was a term of the Agreement that the purchase price of the 50 acres was to be Kshs. 90,000,000 and that upon payment of Kshs. 9,000,000 as deposit, the Defendant was supposed to sub-divide the land and have the 50 acres transferred to the Plaintiff.
5. After conducting a search, PW1 informed the court that they discovered that the Defendant had sub-divided the land into two portions and had both titles registered in her name; that the Plaintiff is entitled to a reimbursement of Kshs. 9,000,000 plus 10% of the purchase price as per the terms of the Sale Agreement. PW1 produced in evidence the copy of Sale Agreement dated 16th December, 2015 together with a copy of the RTGS transfer form. The Plaintiff’s advocate did not file submissions.
6. The evidence before me shows that the Defendant was registered as the proprietor of land known as Donyo Sabuk/Komarock/48365. According to the Sale Agreement of 16th December, 2015, the Defendant agreed to sale to the Plaintiff a portion of the suit land measuring 50 acres for Kshs. 90,000,000. A deposit of Kshs. 9,000,000 was paid by the Plaintiff upon execution of the Agreement of Sale.
7. The Agreement provided that the balance of the purchase price of Kshs. 81,000,000 was to be paid on or before the completion date. The completion date was to be 90 days from the date of the Agreement or within fourteen (14) days of the successful sub-division and registration of the transfer in favour of the Plaintiff, whichever is earlier.
8. PW1 informed the court that although the Defendant sub-divided the land as agreed, she has declined to transfer the portion of the suit land to the Plaintiff as agreed.
9. The Defendant has not controverted the Plaintiff’s evidence. According to Clause 13(a) of the Agreement of Sale, the Defendant was under an obligation to refund all the amounts paid by the Plaintiff within fourteen (14) days plus 10% interest of the purchase price in case she defaults. Considering that there is no evidence to show that the Plaintiff was in breach of the Agreement, this court can do no more than enforce the Agreement of Sale of 16th December, 2015. The said Agreement provides that the Defendant should refund to the Plaintiff not only the Kshs. 9,000,000 that she was paid, but also 10% interest of the purchase price. For those reasons, I allow the Plaintiff’s Plaint dated 18th October, 2017 in the following terms:
a. The Defendant to reimburse the Plaintiff a sum of Kshs. 9,000,000.
b. In addition to (a) above, the Defendant to pay to the Plaintiff a penalty of Kshs. 9,000,000 being 10% interest of the purchase price as provided for under Clause 13(a) of the Sale Agreement of 16th December, 2015.
c. The Defendant to pay interest on the above sums at court rates with effect from the date of filing this suit until payment in full.
d. The Defendant to pay the costs of the suit.
DATED, DELIVERED AND SIGNED IN MACHAKOS THIS 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018.
O.A. ANGOTE
JUDGE