[2018] KEHC 3606 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 3606 (KLR)

The court held that the respondent, as a joint purchaser under the land sale agreement, was entitled to a refund of the purchase price after the agreement became void for lack of Land Control Board consent. The suit was not statute barred as it was filed within the twelve-year limitation period applicable to actions to recover land. The respondent did not require letters of administration since she sued in her own capacity as a party to the agreement. The trial magistrate erred only in awarding interest from the date of the agreement; interest should run from the date the suit was filed. The award of costs to the respondent was proper as the appellant was in breach of the agreement.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 3606 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Patrick Wafula; Respondent: Tabitha B. Gitangwa
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Bungoma
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
4 October 2018
Case Number
Civil Appeal 71 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with variation as to the date from which interest is payable.
Legal Topics
Land Sale Agreements, Limitation of Actions, Specific Performance, Land Control Board Consent, Refund of Purchase Price
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Land Sale Agreements Limitation of Actions Specific Performance Land Control Board Consent Refund of Purchase Price

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Wafula

Appellant

Tabitha B. Gitangwa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was entitled to a refund of the purchase price following a void land sale agreement for lack of Land Control Board consent.
  2. 2 Whether the suit was statute barred under the Limitation of Actions Act.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent had locus standi to sue without letters of administration.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the respondent, as a joint purchaser under the land sale agreement, was entitled to a refund of the purchase price after the agreement became void for lack of Land Control Board consent. The suit was not statute barred as it was filed within the twelve-year limitation period applicable to actions to recover land. The respondent did not require letters of administration since she sued in her own capacity as a party to the agreement. The trial magistrate erred only in awarding interest from the date of the agreement; interest should run from the date the suit was filed. The award of costs to the respondent was proper as the appellant was in breach of the agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with variation as to the date from which interest is payable.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The respondent is entitled to a refund of Ksh.120,000 with interest thereon from 1st April 2008.