[2017] KEELC 94 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 94 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated, through uncontroverted evidence including sale agreements and payment receipts, that they purchased and occupied their respective portions of land. The defendants, having failed to file a defence or appear, did not challenge the plaintiffs' claims. The court held...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 94 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Robert Adongo Nyabola Aloo; Plaintiff: Martin Sulubu Kiraga; Plaintiff: Grace Wakio Scaver; Plaintiff: Salim Mohamed Pandu; Plaintiff: Ali Hamisi Kombo; Plaintiff: Hadji Mfaume Yusuf; Plaintiff: Salimini Mfaume Yusuf; Plaintiff: Juma Charo Karisa; Plaintiff: Joseph Mukunga Ndiritu; Plaintiff: Hassan Ali Magendo; Plaintiff: Ali Shante Mohamed; Plaintiff: Mutindi Mavuti; Plaintiff: James Ng’ang’a Kamau; Plaintiff: Mwikaba Aquiline Maghenda; Defendant: Juma Kisaga; Defendant: Mwinyi Kisaga
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 302 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment After Formal Proof Following Interlocutory Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiffs
Judges
LC Komingoi
Legal Topics
Ownership Disputes, Injunctions, Quiet Enjoyment, Sale of Land, Title Deeds
Source Language
en
Land and Property Ownership Disputes Injunctions Quiet Enjoyment Sale of Land Title Deeds

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Adongo Nyabola Aloo

Plaintiff

Martin Sulubu Kiraga

Plaintiff

Grace Wakio Scaver

Plaintiff

Salim Mohamed Pandu

Plaintiff

Ali Hamisi Kombo

Plaintiff

Hadji Mfaume Yusuf

Plaintiff

Salimini Mfaume Yusuf

Plaintiff

Juma Charo Karisa

Plaintiff

Joseph Mukunga Ndiritu

Plaintiff

Hassan Ali Magendo

Plaintiff

Ali Shante Mohamed

Plaintiff

Mutindi Mavuti

Plaintiff

James Ng’ang’a Kamau

Plaintiff

Mwikaba Aquiline Maghenda

Plaintiff

Juma Kisaga

Defendant

Mwinyi Kisaga

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment After Formal Proof Following Interlocutory Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are the lawful owners of their respective portions of land within Plot Number 375/1/MN.
  2. 2 Whether the defendants should be permanently restrained from interfering with the plaintiffs' quiet enjoyment and use of their land.
  3. 3 Whether the defendants should be compelled to cease intimidation, interference, and demands for additional payments beyond the agreed purchase price.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated, through uncontroverted evidence including sale agreements and payment receipts, that they purchased and occupied their respective portions of land. The defendants, having failed to file a defence or appear, did not challenge the plaintiffs' claims. The court held that the plaintiffs had proved their case on a balance of probabilities and were entitled to the reliefs sought, including a permanent injunction, a declaration of ownership, and an order restraining the defendants from further interference or demands for additional payments. Costs were awarded to the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiffs

Orders

  • A permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' quiet enjoyment and use of their respective portions of land within Plot Number 375/1/MN.
  • A declaration that the plaintiffs are the lawful owners of their respective portions of land within Plot Number 375/1/MN.