[2018] KEELC 4164 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 4164 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had been in continuous, open, and peaceful occupation of the suit land for over 25 years, a fact that was uncontroverted due to the defendants' absence and failure to challenge the evidence. The registration of the land in the defendants' names in 2001 did not interrupt the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 4164 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Stephen Parmois Leshao; Defendant: Joseph Njeru Karanja; Defendant: Charles Simiyu Nasibu Wekesa; Defendant: Simion Mwangi Menu; Defendant: Charles Nyangai Seme
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Narok
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 316 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
judgment_for_plaintiff
Judges
MN Kullow
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Limitation of Actions, Title Extinguishment
Source Language
en
Land and Property Adverse Possession Limitation of Actions Title Extinguishment

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Parmois Leshao

Plaintiff

Joseph Njeru Karanja

Defendant

Charles Simiyu Nasibu Wekesa

Defendant

Simion Mwangi Menu

Defendant

Charles Nyangai Seme

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has been in continuous and uninterrupted occupation of the suit land for over 12 years to entitle him to adverse possession.
  2. 2 Whether the defendants' rights and title to the suit land have been extinguished under the Limitation of Actions Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had been in continuous, open, and peaceful occupation of the suit land for over 25 years, a fact that was uncontroverted due to the defendants' absence and failure to challenge the evidence. The registration of the land in the defendants' names in 2001 did not interrupt the plaintiff's adverse possession, as established in Githu v Ndette. The court held that the defendants' rights and title to the land had been extinguished under section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act, and the plaintiff was entitled to be registered as the owner of the suit parcels by virtue of adverse possession.

Court Disposition

judgment_for_plaintiff

Orders

  • A declaration is issued that the defendants' right to recover the suit land Trans Mara/Moyoi/122,125,132,162 is barred under section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act and the title extinguished.
  • The Deputy Registrar is to execute transfer instruments and all other attendant documents to facilitate the transfer and registration of LR parcels No. Trans Mara Moyoi/122,125,132 and 162 in favour of the plaintiff if the defendants default in executing the same.