[2013] KEELC 101 (KLR)

[2013] KEELC 101 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff, as the registered proprietor of the disputed parcel of land, retains the legal right to dispose of it, especially in light of his urgent medical needs and the fact that he has already distributed the other parcels among his children and wife. The Defendants failed to file any...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEELC 101 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: N K G; Defendant: M N K; Defendant: M W W; Defendant: T N K; Defendant: L N G; Defendant: J W K; Defendant: H N N; Defendant: B N; Defendant: NI W M; Defendant: S C K; Defendant: E M
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 3 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's Originating Summons allowed.
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Ownership Dispute, Transfer of Land, Family Land Distribution
Source Language
en
Land and Property Ownership Dispute Transfer of Land Family Land Distribution

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

N K G

Plaintiff

M N K

Defendant

M W W

Defendant

T N K

Defendant

L N G

Defendant

J W K

Defendant

H N N

Defendant

B N

Defendant

NI W M

Defendant

S C K

Defendant

E M

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff has the right to sell land parcel Lamu/Lake Kenyatta/[Particulars withheld] registered in his or his wife's name.
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants can lawfully prevent the Plaintiff from disposing of the said parcel to facilitate his medical relocation.
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff has already equitably distributed other parcels among his children and wife.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff, as the registered proprietor of the disputed parcel of land, retains the legal right to dispose of it, especially in light of his urgent medical needs and the fact that he has already distributed the other parcels among his children and wife. The Defendants failed to file any evidence or legal basis to oppose the Plaintiff's application. The court further held that the Plaintiff's health condition and the medical advice to relocate to a colder climate justified the sale. The Defendants' objections were unsupported and amounted to an unreasonable obstruction of the Plaintiff's proprietary rights. The court therefore allowed the Plaintiff to sell the land...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's Originating Summons allowed.

Orders

  • The Plaintiff is allowed to sell land parcel number Lamu/Kenyatta/[Particulars withheld] to obtain finances for relocation.
  • The Land Control Board is directed to grant consent for the transfer of the said parcel, notwithstanding the Defendants' objections.