[2018] KEELC 373 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that they purchased Plot No. 56 Kapkoi Settlement Scheme from the defendant in 1991 and have been in possession since then. The documentary evidence, including the sale agreement, charge, letter of offer, and payment receipt, established...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 373 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Munyua Gachuhi; Plaintiff: Mburu Ndua; Defendant: Michael Ndiwa Kimtai
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 38 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Land Case / Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment for the plaintiffs as prayed in the plaint.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Ownership Disputes, Land Registration, Injunctive Relief
- 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
Munyua Gachuhi
Plaintiff
Mburu Ndua
Plaintiff
Michael Ndiwa Kimtai
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs are the rightful owners of Plot No. 56 Kapkoi Settlement Scheme.
- 2 Whether the defendant has any proprietary interest in Plot No. 56 Kapkoi Settlement Scheme.
- 3 Whether the title deed issued to the defendant should be cancelled and the register rectified in favour of the plaintiffs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that they purchased Plot No. 56 Kapkoi Settlement Scheme from the defendant in 1991 and have been in possession since then. The documentary evidence, including the sale agreement, charge, letter of offer, and payment receipt, established that the defendant had sold the land to the plaintiffs. The defendant, despite being served, failed to contest the suit or present any evidence to the contrary. Consequently, the court held that the plaintiffs are entitled to the reliefs sought, including a declaration of ownership, cancellation of the defendant's title, rectification of the register, and an injunction...
Court Disposition
Judgment for the plaintiffs as prayed in the plaint.
Orders
- A declaration is issued that Plot No. 56 Kapkoi Settlement Scheme belongs to the plaintiffs.
- The defendant has no proprietary interest in Plot No. 56 Kapkoi Settlement Scheme.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KITALE
LAND CASE NO. 38 OF 2017
MUNYUA GACHUHI.............................................................1STPLAINTIFF
MBURU NDUA......................................................................2ND PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MICHAEL NDIWA KIMTAI..................................................DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiffs filed this suit on 2/3/2017 seeking orders of a declaration that Plot No 56 Kapkoi Settlement Scheme belongs to them and the defendant has no proprietary interest in it, an alternative order that the trust do terminate and the title deed issued to the defendant herein be cancelled and the title be issued in the names of the plaintiffs and the register be rectified, and lastly, an injunction restraining the defendant/defendant from effecting the transfer of Plot No. 56 in Kapkoi Settlement Schemeinto his name.
2. An interim order of injunction was issued by this court on 2/3/2017 when the matter came up on the hearing of an application for an interim injunction under certificate of urgency. That order was extended twice in the absence of the defendant who, despite service never entered appearance or filed any defence to the suit or the application for interim injunction dated 1/3/2017 in the suit. That application and the suit are unopposed.
3. I am satisfied that the defendant was served as described in the affidavit of service sworn by Concephter Oduor, the process server on 9/3/2017 and filed in the record on 16/3/2017.
4. The plaintiff’s case is that they purchased the Plot No. 56inKapkoi Settlement Scheme in1991 and that they have been in possession ever since. The plaintiffs have learnt that the defendant has now obtained a discharge and is in the process of registering himself as the owner of the land. They therefore plead that they would be prejudiced in the event the land was so registered in the defendant’s name.
5. The 1st plaintiff testified on behalf of both plaintiffs on 25/10/2018 and adopted his written statement filed in the record. He produced an agreement dated 19/10/1991vide which the defendant sold the land to the plaintiffs; a charge dated 27/5/1991, a letter of offer dated 27/5/1991, and a payment receipt dated 27/5/1991.
6. From the oral evidence and the documents produced I am persuaded that the suit land was allocated to the defendant and that he sold the same to the plaintiffs.
7. I find that the plaintiffs have proved their claim on a balance of probabilities. I therefore enter judgment for the plaintiffs against the defendant as prayed in prayers (a), (b), (c)and(d) of the plaint dated 1/3/2017.
Signed, dated and delivered at Kitale on this 3rdday of December, 2018.
MWANGI NJOROGE
JUDGE
3/12/2018
Coram:
Before -Hon. Mwangi Njoroge, Judge
Court Assistant - Picoty
Ms. Munialo for plaintiffs
N/A for the defendant
COURT
Judgment read in open court.
MWANGI NJOROGE
JUDGE
3/12/2018