[2019] KEHC 1326 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 1326 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had established his entitlement to the suit properties through allotment letters, payment receipts, and uncontroverted evidence. The defendants failed to adduce any evidence to support their claims of ownership or lawful possession. Given the confiscation of original documents by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 1326 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Tekie Ghebrimichael; Defendant: Nairobi City County; Defendant: Chief Officer, Lands, Nairobi City County; Defendant: Registrar of Titles; Defendant: Chief Lands Registrar; Defendant: National Lands Commission
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 474 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics
Ownership Disputes, Compulsory Acquisition, Compensation for Land, Title Registration
Source Language
en
Land and Property Ownership Disputes Compulsory Acquisition Compensation for Land Title Registration

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tekie Ghebrimichael

Plaintiff

Nairobi City County

Defendant

Chief Officer, Lands, Nairobi City County

Defendant

Registrar of Titles

Defendant

Chief Lands Registrar

Defendant

National Lands Commission

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is the legal proprietor of LR No.25201/3 Ngara and LR No.25201/4 Ngara, Deed Plan No.237872.
  2. 2 Whether the defendants unlawfully interfered with the plaintiff's proprietary rights over the suit properties.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to compensation for the suit properties if title cannot be processed in his name.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had established his entitlement to the suit properties through allotment letters, payment receipts, and uncontroverted evidence. The defendants failed to adduce any evidence to support their claims of ownership or lawful possession. Given the confiscation of original documents by Nairobi City County officials and the council's own application to be allocated the same land, the court concluded that the plaintiff's proprietary rights had been unlawfully interfered with. However, due to the practical impossibility of processing title in the plaintiff's name, the court determined that compensation at the established market value was the most appropriate...

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd defendants jointly and severally for Kshs.250,000,000 as compensation for the suit properties.
  • The plaintiff shall have costs of the suit and interest payable by the 1st and 2nd defendants.