[2017] KEHC 4006 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 4006 (KLR)

The court found that the defendant admitted during cross-examination that land parcel 1029 is ancestral land, thus establishing it as family land held in trust for family members. However, the plaintiffs failed to justify why they should receive larger portions than their siblings, particularly their sisters. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 4006 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Silas Mburung'a Mathiu; Plaintiff: Julius Kijogi Mathiu; Defendant: Mathiu Mugane
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
19 July 2017
Case Number
Civil Case 45 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiffs' claim dismissed; defendant's counterclaim allowed.
Legal Topics
Customary Trusts, Family Land Disputes, Gifts of Land, Land Registration, Injunctions, Gender Equality in Land Distribution
Source Language
english
Land and Property Customary Trusts Family Land Disputes Gifts of Land Land Registration Injunctions Gender Equality in Land Distribution

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Silas Mburung'a Mathiu

Plaintiff

Julius Kijogi Mathiu

Plaintiff

Mathiu Mugane

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is holding land parcel No. 1029 in trust for the plaintiffs.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant gave each plaintiff 4 acres of land in 1999 or thereabout.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant admitted during cross-examination that land parcel 1029 is ancestral land, thus establishing it as family land held in trust for family members. However, the plaintiffs failed to justify why they should receive larger portions than their siblings, particularly their sisters. The court emphasized that gender equality under Article 27 of the Constitution requires equal treatment of sons and daughters in the distribution of family land. The plaintiffs' claim for 4 acres each failed both on the basis of trust and as a purported gift, as there was insufficient evidence that the gift was perfected or crystallized into proprietary rights. The defendant's...

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' claim dismissed; defendant's counterclaim allowed.

Orders

  • Each plaintiff is entitled to two acres of land from parcel Nos. 3210 and 3214 respectively.
  • A permanent injunction restraining the plaintiffs from interfering with parcel Nos. 3211, 3213, and 3212, which are reserved for the defendant and his two daughters.