[2006] KEHC 2563 (KLR)
The court found that the Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal acted outside its statutory mandate by purporting to determine contractual rights relating to the sale of land and by granting the remedy of specific performance, which it had no power to do under the Land Disputes Tribunals Act. The Tribunal's proceedings and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2006] KEHC 2563 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Anyangu Kutoto Kulikula; Respondent: The Chairman, The Land Disputes Tribunal, Lurambi Division; Interested Party: Simon Andayi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application 49 of 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Certiorari
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Decision of the Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal quashed. Each party to bear its own costs.
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of Land Disputes Tribunal, Specific Performance, Land Sale Contracts
- 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
Anyangu Kutoto Kulikula
Applicant
The Chairman, The Land Disputes Tribunal, Lurambi Division
Respondent
Simon Andayi
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Certiorari
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Land Disputes Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine matters relating to title to land or to enforce a contract for specific performance.
- 2 Whether the Tribunal's decision to order subdivision and transfer of land was ultra vires.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal acted outside its statutory mandate by purporting to determine contractual rights relating to the sale of land and by granting the remedy of specific performance, which it had no power to do under the Land Disputes Tribunals Act. The Tribunal's proceedings and decision were therefore a nullity for want of jurisdiction, and the order of certiorari was granted to quash the impugned decision.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Decision of the Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal quashed. Each party to bear its own costs.
Orders
- Order of certiorari granted quashing the decision of the Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal dated 29.3.05.
- Each party shall bear its own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA Misc Civ Appli 49 of 2005
REPUBLIC ……………………………...........…..............................………… APPLICANT
AND
THE CHAIRMANTHE LAND DISPUTES TRIBUNAL
LURAMBI DIVISION …………… RESPONDENT
AND
SIMON ANDAYI ……............................................………………… INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
The ex-parte applicant, Anyangu Kutoto Kulikula, filed the application dated 3. 8.05 seeking an order of Certiorari to quash the decision of Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal made on 29. 3.05 in Tribunal Land Disputes case No. 12 of 2004 affecting land title No. Butsotso/Bukura/24. The main ground for the application was that the said Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to deal with title to land or to enforce a contract by giving the remedy of specific performance.
The interested party, Simon Andayi, was the party allegedly in possession of the land. It seems he had entered into a written agreement dated 1-12-88 to purchase a portion of the said land from the Applicant and taken possession of the said portion in pursuance of the agreement. In his affidavit in reply to the application, he annexed a copy of the said agreement marked “S.A.1”. His contention was that the Tribunal did not overstep its powers because he was already in possession of the land and the question of specific performance did not arise. He lamented that the exparte applicant had declined to go to the Land Control Board to facilitate the grant of consent to the sale.
The proceedings and decision of the Tribunal exhibited in the verifying affidavit show that the issue before the Tribunal concerned the Contract for the sale of the land by the exparte applicant to the interested party. The Tribunal’s decision was to the effect that the said land would be subdivided and a portion of 2 acres transferred to the Interested Party. In effect, the Tribunal purported to determine the rights of the parties under the said Contract and gave a remedy of specific performance. It had neither the power to hear the dispute nor award the remedy. The proceedings and the decision were a complete nullity.
I allow the application. I grant the order sought and quash the decision dated 29. 3.05 by Lurambi Land Disputes Tribunal. Each party shall bear its own costs.
Dated, sighed and delivered at Kakamega this 2nd day o March, 2006
G. B. M. KARIUKI
J U D G E