[2010] KEHC 1875 (KLR)
The court found that the dispute before both the Tribunal and the Committee was over ownership of land, not mere occupation. Under the Land Disputes Tribunals Act, such bodies lack jurisdiction to determine ownership disputes. As a result, their decisions were made without jurisdiction and are therefore null and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 1875 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Nyandarua North (Ol’joro-orok) Land Disputes Tribunal; Respondent: Central Provincial Land Appeals Tribunal, Nyeri; Applicant: Patrick Ndungu’u Wamhugu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review 88 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Ruling
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Certiorari granted. Costs to applicant.
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of Land Tribunals, Certiorari, Land Ownership Disputes
- 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
Republic
Applicant
Nyandarua North (Ol’joro-orok) Land Disputes Tribunal
Respondent
Central Provincial Land Appeals Tribunal, Nyeri
Respondent
Patrick Ndungu’u Wamhugu
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Land Disputes Tribunal and the Provincial Land Appeals Committee had jurisdiction to determine disputes relating to ownership of land.
- 2 Whether the decisions of the Tribunal and Committee should be quashed by an order of certiorari.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the dispute before both the Tribunal and the Committee was over ownership of land, not mere occupation. Under the Land Disputes Tribunals Act, such bodies lack jurisdiction to determine ownership disputes. As a result, their decisions were made without jurisdiction and are therefore null and void. The court granted an order of certiorari to quash both decisions and awarded costs to the applicant.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Certiorari granted. Costs to applicant.
Orders
- An order of certiorari is issued to quash the decisions of the Nyandarua North (Ol’joro-orok) Land Disputes Tribunal and the Central Provincial Land Appeals Tribunal, Nyeri.
- The applicant is awarded the costs of this application against the 3rd Respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
Judicial Review 88 of 2009
REPUBLIC……………………………….………...APPLICANT
VERSUS
NYANDARUA NORTH (OL’JORO-OROK)
LAND DIPSUTES TRIBUNAL………….…1ST RESPONDENT
CENTRAL PROVINCIAL LAND
APPEALS TRIBUNAL, NYERI………...…3RD RESPONDENT
AND
PATRICK NDUNGU’U WAMHUGU……....…..……..EX-PARTE
RULING
In his Notice of Motion dated 4th August 2009 and brought under Sections 8 and 9 of the Law Reform Act as well as Order 53 Rules 3, 4 and 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Patrick Ndungu Wambugu, the Ex-parte applicant (the Applicant) seeks an order of certiorari to bring to this court and quash the decisions of Nyandarua North (Ol’joro-orok) Land Disputes Tribunal (the Tribunal) and the Nyeri Provincial Land Appeals Committee (the Committee) arising from Tribunal Case No. 007 of 2008 on the ground that both the Tribunal and the Committee had no jurisdiction to entertain the matter. It is submitted on behalf of the Applicant that the dispute before both the Tribunal and the Committee related to ownership of land with both of them had no jurisdiction to determine.
On behalf of the 3rd Respondent, it is submitted that the dispute was over occupation of the suit pieces of land and not ownership.
The Committee’s decision on the matter was this:-
“Having perused through all the relevant documents and having listened to both parties, the Nyandarua District Surveyor should combine plot NO. Ol’joro-orok Salient/12711,12712 and 12713 and have them re-surveyed such that the appellant get (sic) his right share of two plots and respondent Teresiah Wanja Ngari get (sic) a plot at the area where she has developed.”
Having perused the record and the above decision, I agree with counsel for the Applicant that this was clearly a dispute was over ownership and not mere occupation of land as contended by counsel for the 3rd Respondent. Both the Tribunal and the Committee had therefore no jurisdiction to entertain the matter. Consequently I allow this application. An order of certiorari shall issue to quash both the Tribunal and the Committee’s decisions in the matter. The Applicant shall have the costs of this application against the 3rd Respondent.
DATED and DELIVERED at Nakuru this 12th day of May 2010.
D. K. MARAGA
JUDGE.