[2020] KEELC 2990 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 2990 (KLR)

The court found that the 1st Defendant was not the registered owner of the suit property and had no legal capacity to sub-divide or sell it. The sub-divisions and subsequent transfers to the 2nd to 5th Defendants were fraudulent and illegal. The 2nd Plaintiff, having paid Kshs 365,000/- as purchase price and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 2990 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Thomas Jerry Khamisi; Plaintiff: Edward Mwamuye Mwadzoya; Defendant: Austin Sadala Khamisi; Defendant: Catherine Waithira Ndambiri; Defendant: Agnes Nyale Mwangemi; Defendant: Josephine Muringo Ndambiri; Defendant: Mercy Roseline Ndambiri
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 33 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiffs as prayed in the Plaint.
Judges
JO Olola
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Transfer, Land Ownership, Title Registration, Trespass, Compensation for Developments
Source Language
en
Land and Property Fraudulent Transfer Land Ownership Title Registration Trespass Compensation for Developments

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Jerry Khamisi

Plaintiff

Edward Mwamuye Mwadzoya

Plaintiff

Austin Sadala Khamisi

Defendant

Catherine Waithira Ndambiri

Defendant

Agnes Nyale Mwangemi

Defendant

Josephine Muringo Ndambiri

Defendant

Mercy Roseline Ndambiri

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Defendant had legal capacity to sell and sub-divide the suit property.
  2. 2 Whether the sub-division and sale of the suit property to the 2nd to 5th Defendants was fraudulent and illegal.
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd Plaintiff is entitled to a refund of the purchase price and compensation for developments made on the suit property.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 1st Defendant was not the registered owner of the suit property and had no legal capacity to sub-divide or sell it. The sub-divisions and subsequent transfers to the 2nd to 5th Defendants were fraudulent and illegal. The 2nd Plaintiff, having paid Kshs 365,000/- as purchase price and constructed a house valued at Kshs 450,000/-, was entitled to a refund and compensation. The Plaintiffs proved their case on a balance of probabilities, warranting cancellation of the fraudulent sub-divisions, restoration of the land register, a permanent injunction against the Defendants, refund of the purchase price, compensation for developments, and costs of the suit.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiffs as prayed in the Plaint.

Orders

  • The 1st Defendant shall refund Kshs 365,000/- to the 2nd Plaintiff.
  • The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Defendants shall compensate the 2nd Plaintiff Kshs 450,000/- for developments on the property, with interest at court rates.