[2011] KEHC 80 (KLR)
The court found that the Bondo Land Dispute Tribunal acted outside its statutory mandate by entertaining a dispute involving land with a registered title. The Tribunal's jurisdiction does not extend to such matters, and its decision, as well as the adoption of that decision by the Magistrate's Court, was therefore a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 80 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Senior Resident Magistrate Bondo; Respondent: Chairman Bondo District Land Dispute Tribunal; Interested Party: Margaret Apiyo Ombera; Applicant: Gilbert Otolo Ochieng; Applicant: John Humphreys Ouma
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 1 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Substantive Judicial Review Application
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- HK Chemitei
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Certiorari, Prohibition, Land Disputes, Tribunal Jurisdiction
- 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
Senior Resident Magistrate Bondo
Respondent
Chairman Bondo District Land Dispute Tribunal
Respondent
Margaret Apiyo Ombera
Interested Party
Gilbert Otolo Ochieng
Applicant
John Humphreys Ouma
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Substantive Judicial Review Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Bondo Land Dispute Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain a dispute involving land with a registered title.
- 2 Whether the orders issued by the Tribunal and adopted by the Magistrate's Court should be quashed by certiorari.
- 3 Whether prohibition should issue to restrain the respondents from further proceedings regarding the suit land.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Bondo Land Dispute Tribunal acted outside its statutory mandate by entertaining a dispute involving land with a registered title. The Tribunal's jurisdiction does not extend to such matters, and its decision, as well as the adoption of that decision by the Magistrate's Court, was therefore a nullity. The failure to include all owners of the land as parties further rendered the proceedings defective. Consequently, the court allowed the application for judicial review, quashed the Tribunal's decision, and prohibited the respondents from taking further proceedings regarding the suit land.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- An order of certiorari is issued quashing the orders of the Bondo Land Dispute Tribunal and their adoption by the Magistrate's Court in respect of land parcel SIAYA / GOT AGULU / 378.
- An order of prohibition is issued restraining the respondents from entering fresh or further proceedings regarding land parcel SIAYA / GOT AGULU / 378.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KISUMU
Miscellaneous Application 1 of 2011
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICTAION BY GILBERT OTOLO OCHICNEG AND JOHN HUMPHREYS OUMA FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE NATURE OF ORDERS OF CERTIORARI AND PHOHIBITION
AND
IN THE MATETR OF LAND PARCEL NO. SIAYA / GOT AGULU / 378
REPUBLIC ………………………………………………………..APPLICANT
VERSUS
THE SENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRTE BONDO……...…1ST RESPONDENT
THE CHAIRMAN BONDO DISTRICT
LAND DISPUTE TRIBUNAL…………………..…………2ND RESPONDENT
AND
MARGARET APIYO OMBERA…………..…………….INTERESTED PARTY
AND
GILBERT OTOLO OCHIENG………………..……….EX-PARTE APPLICANT
JOHN HUMPHREYS OUMA………………………….EXPARTE APPLICANT
RULING
The application dated 29th June 2011 seeks the following orders:-
(a)An order of certiorari removing into this Honourable court the orders issued by the 2nd respondent NO. BON/114/2010 Bondo Land Dispute Tribunal and adopted by the 1st respondent in Bondo SRMCC Mis Application number 24 of 2010 in respect of land parcel number SIAYA / GOT AGULU/378 for the purpose of the same being quashed.
(b)An order of prohibition directed at the 1st and 2nd respondent restraining them by themselves, agents, servants or otherwise howsoever from entering fresh or further proceedings in respect of land parcel number SIAYA / GOT AGULU / 378.
(c)Costs
The said application was not opposed. I have also perused the affidavit of service by one Kennedy O. Owiti dated 18th July 2011 and I am satisfied with the service.
The applicant now owns the land with one John Humphrey Ouma. He was never made a party. Further the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain this claim as it involved land with a title. The tribunal mandate is well clear and doesn’t included land with title as in the present case.
For these reason I allow the application as prayed. The applicant shall have the cost of the application.
Orders accordingly.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kisumu this 11th day of November 2011.
H. K. CHEMITEI
JUDGE