[2016] KEELC 681 (KLR)

[2016] KEELC 681 (KLR)

The court found that although the plaintiff had entered into a sale agreement with the 1st defendant and paid Kshs.535,000 towards the purchase of 5 acres of land, the agreement became void for want of Land Control Board consent as required by Section 6 of the Land Control Act. Since the property had already been...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEELC 681 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Said Kosgey Chebii; Defendant: Paul Kimutai Chemweno; Defendant: Thomas Cherotich
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 157 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for specific performance dismissed; claim for refund of purchase price allowed.
Judges
A Ombwayo
Legal Topics
Sale of Land, Specific Performance, Fraudulent Transfer, Land Control Board Consent, Recovery of Purchase Price
Source Language
en
Land and Property Sale of Land Specific Performance Fraudulent Transfer Land Control Board Consent Recovery of Purchase Price

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Said Kosgey Chebii

Plaintiff

Paul Kimutai Chemweno

Defendant

Thomas Cherotich

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether there was a valid sale agreement between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant for 5 acres of land.
  2. 2 Whether the 1st defendant fraudulently resold the land to the 2nd defendant.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to specific performance or refund of the purchase price.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the plaintiff had entered into a sale agreement with the 1st defendant and paid Kshs.535,000 towards the purchase of 5 acres of land, the agreement became void for want of Land Control Board consent as required by Section 6 of the Land Control Act. Since the property had already been transferred to the 2nd defendant, who appeared to be an innocent purchaser for value, the remedy of specific performance was unavailable. However, under Section 7 of the Land Control Act, the plaintiff was entitled to recover the purchase price paid as a debt. The court therefore ordered the 1st defendant to refund the plaintiff the sum of Kshs.535,000 plus costs and interest...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for specific performance dismissed; claim for refund of purchase price allowed.

Orders

  • The 1st defendant shall refund the plaintiff Kshs.535,000.
  • The 1st defendant shall pay costs of the suit to the plaintiff.