[2023] KEELC 496 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 496 (KLR)

The court found that the consent dated January 26, 2023, was duly executed by the plaintiff, defendant, and 1st interested party, all of whom affirmed its terms in open court. There was no evidence of fraud, collusion, or any vitiating factor. The consent clearly set out the obligations of each party regarding the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 496 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Agabatus Ogalo Okoth; Defendant: Lawrence Morty Opiyo Okelo; Interested Party: Collins Omondi Achiles; Interested Party: Joseph Opiyo; Interested Party: District Land Registrare Homa-Bay
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 33 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Adoption of Consent
Outcome
Consent adopted as order of the court; suit fixed for mention to confirm compliance.
Judges
GMA Ongondo
Legal Topics
Land Transfer, Consent Orders, Removal of Restriction, Land Registration
Source Language
en
Land and Property Land Transfer Consent Orders Removal of Restriction Land Registration

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Agabatus Ogalo Okoth

Plaintiff

Lawrence Morty Opiyo Okelo

Defendant

Collins Omondi Achiles

Interested Party

Joseph Opiyo

Interested Party

District Land Registrare Homa-Bay

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Adoption of Consent

  1. 1 Whether the consent filed by the parties should be adopted as an order of the court.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should transfer 2.9 acres of LR No Kabuoch/K/K/Karita/755 to the plaintiff as agreed.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff should remove the restriction on the land upon compliance with the consent terms.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the consent dated January 26, 2023, was duly executed by the plaintiff, defendant, and 1st interested party, all of whom affirmed its terms in open court. There was no evidence of fraud, collusion, or any vitiating factor. The consent clearly set out the obligations of each party regarding the transfer of 2.9 acres of LR No Kabuoch/K/K/Karita/755, the execution of necessary documents, and the removal of restriction upon compliance. The court, therefore, adopted the consent as an order, holding that it was binding on the parties and enforceable as such. The matter was fixed for mention to confirm compliance, and further directions were to be given as necessary.

Court Disposition

Consent adopted as order of the court; suit fixed for mention to confirm compliance.

Orders

  • The consent dated January 26, 2023, is adopted as an order of the court in its entirety.
  • The defendant shall transfer 2.9 acres of LR No Kabuoch/K/K/Karita/755 to the plaintiff at the plaintiff's cost.