[2023] KEELC 815 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 815 (KLR)

The court found that the 1st respondent had no legal or equitable interest in the suit property to justify the registration of a caveat or the continued holding of the original certificate of title. There was no evidence of a charge or any valid agreement between the deceased and the bank, and the previous High...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 815 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hasmukhrai Manilal Parekh; Applicant: Ramesh Manilal Parekh; Respondent: Access Bank (Kenya) PLC (Formerly Trans National Bank Limited); Respondent: Chief Land Registrar
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E324 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
Outcome
Application allowed; mandatory injunctions and orders granted as prayed.
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Caveats and Encumbrances, Title Registration, Mandatory Injunctions, Fraudulent Registration
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Caveats and Encumbrances Title Registration Mandatory Injunctions Fraudulent 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hasmukhrai Manilal Parekh

Applicant

Ramesh Manilal Parekh

Applicant

Access Bank (Kenya) PLC (Formerly Trans National Bank Limited)

Respondent

Chief Land Registrar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

  1. 1 Whether the caveat registered by the 1st respondent over LR No 1870/I/394 is null, void, fraudulent, and illegal.
  2. 2 Whether the 1st respondent should be compelled to withdraw the caveat and release the original certificate of title to the applicants.
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd respondent should be ordered to deregister the caveat if the 1st respondent fails to comply.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 1st respondent had no legal or equitable interest in the suit property to justify the registration of a caveat or the continued holding of the original certificate of title. There was no evidence of a charge or any valid agreement between the deceased and the bank, and the previous High Court judgment had dismissed the bank's claim against the deceased. The respondents failed to oppose the application or provide any material to support their position. The court concluded that the caveat was registered without legal basis, was therefore null and void, and that the applicants were entitled to the mandatory orders sought for withdrawal and deregistration of the...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; mandatory injunctions and orders granted as prayed.

Orders

  • A mandatory injunction is issued compelling the 1st respondent to withdraw caveat number IR 36722/2 registered over LR No 1870/I/394 IR 36722 in favour of Trans National Bank Limited.
  • A mandatory injunction is issued compelling the 1st respondent to release the original certificate of title for LR No 1870/I/394, IR 36722 to the applicants.