[2017] KEELC 2544 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiff, as administrator of the Estate of the late Lazarus Manthi Mwania, had provided sufficient documentary evidence to prove ownership of Plot No. 20 Matuu, including receipts and council minutes confirming allocation. The Defendant, having failed to enter appearance or file a defence,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 2544 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Thomas Manthi Mwania; Defendant: Mwelu Martin Kithuku
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 74 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's suit allowed. Judgment entered for the Plaintiff.
- Judges
- OA Angote
- Legal Topics
- Land Ownership, Trespass, Vacant Possession, Fraudulent Subdivision
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Thomas Manthi Mwania
Plaintiff
Mwelu Martin Kithuku
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Estate of the late Lazarus Manthi Mwania is the legal owner of Plot No. 20 Matuu.
- 2 Whether the Defendant trespassed and fraudulently subdivided the suit land.
- 3 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to vacant possession and demolition of structures.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiff, as administrator of the Estate of the late Lazarus Manthi Mwania, had provided sufficient documentary evidence to prove ownership of Plot No. 20 Matuu, including receipts and council minutes confirming allocation. The Defendant, having failed to enter appearance or file a defence, did not challenge the Plaintiff's evidence. The court was satisfied that the Plaintiff had proved her case on a balance of probabilities and was entitled to the reliefs sought, including a declaration of ownership, an order for vacant possession, and demolition of structures erected by the Defendant at her own cost.
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's suit allowed. Judgment entered for the Plaintiff.
Orders
- The Defendant is ordered to render vacant possession of Plot No. 20 in Matuu to the Plaintiff and to demolish at her own cost all structures erected on the said land within 30 days of the date of judgment.
- The Defendant shall pay the costs of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MACHAKOS
ELC. CASE NO. 74 OF 2016
THOMAS MANTHI MWANIA..........................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MWELU MARTIN KITHUKU........................DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
1. In his Plaint dated 9th August, 2016, the Plaintiff averred that he is the administrator of the Estate of the late Lazarus Manthi, the legal owner of Plot No. 20 Matuu; that the Defendant has trespassed on the said land and that the purported sub-division of the suit land into two is a fraud.
2. In the prayers, the Plaintiff is seeking for a declaration that the Estate of the late Lazarus Manthi Mwania is the legal owner of Plot No. 20 Matuu.
3. Although the Defendant was served with the Summons to Enter Appearance, she neither entered appearance nor filed a Defence.
4. The matter proceeded for hearing as undefended on 29th March, 2017.
5. The evidence of PW1 was that she is the legal administrator of the Estate of her late mother; that the suit land is registered in her mother’s name and that when she went to check on it, she found the Defendant has encroached on an area measuring 20 x 100 feet.
6. PW1 produced in evidence the receipts which shows the payments that her late mother made to the Town Council of Matuu in respect to Plot No. 20 and the Minutes of the said Council confirming that Plot No. 20 had been allocated to Ms. Ndungwa Manthi.
7. The evidence before this court shows that indeed the Town Council of Matuu allocated to the Plaintiff’s mother the suit land. The Defendant did not produce any evidence to controvert the Plaintiff’s evidence.
8. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the Plaintiff has proved her case on a balance of probabilities.
9. For those reasons, I allow the Plaintiff’s Plaint dated 9th August, 2016 as follows:
a. An order be and is hereby issued ordering the Defendant to render to the Plaintiff vacant possession Plot No. 20 in Matuu and to demolish at her own cost all the structures erected on the said land within 30 days of the date of this Judgment.
b. The Defendant to pay the costs of the suit.
DATED, DELIVERED AND SIGNED IN MACHAKOS THIS 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2017.
O.A. ANGOTE
JUDGE