[2025] KEELC 3582 (KLR)
The court found that, in light of the Court of Appeal's decision in Sugawara v Kiruti, jurisdiction over adverse possession claims is vested in the Environment and Land Court. The applicant's suit before the Kabiyet Magistrate’s Court concerns adverse possession, and therefore, the Magistrate’s Court lacks...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELC 3582 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Nehemiah Kiplagat Tuitoek; Respondent: Charit Kirwa Kogo; Respondent: Susana Tarwen
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case E003 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Transfer Suit for Hearing and Determination
- Outcome
- Application allowed; suit to be transferred to the Environment and Land Court for hearing and determination.
- Judges
- GMA Ongondo
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Jurisdiction Transfer, Suit Transfer, Limitation of Actions
- 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
Nehemiah Kiplagat Tuitoek
Applicant
Charit Kirwa Kogo
Respondent
Susana Tarwen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Transfer Suit for Hearing and Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Environment and Land Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine claims of adverse possession.
- 2 Whether the suit pending before Kabiyet Magistrate’s Court should be transferred to the Environment and Land Court for hearing and determination.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, in light of the Court of Appeal's decision in Sugawara v Kiruti, jurisdiction over adverse possession claims is vested in the Environment and Land Court. The applicant's suit before the Kabiyet Magistrate’s Court concerns adverse possession, and therefore, the Magistrate’s Court lacks jurisdiction to determine the matter. The court further held that it has the power under the Civil Procedure Act to transfer suits to the appropriate forum. Since the application was unopposed and meritorious, the court allowed the transfer of Kabiyet Magistrate’s Court Case number E027 of 2024 to the Environment and Land Court for hearing and determination.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; suit to be transferred to the Environment and Land Court for hearing and determination.
Orders
- Kabiyet Magistrate’s Court Case number E027 of 2024 is hereby transferred to the Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet for hearing and determination.
- The application is disposed of in its entirety.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Tuitoek v Kogo & another (Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case E003 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 3582 (KLR) (6 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 3582 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet
Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case E003 of 2025
GMA Ongondo, J
May 6, 2025
Between
Nehemiah Kiplagat Tuitoek
Applicant
and
Charit Kirwa Kogo
1st Respondent
Susana Tarwen
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. The instant ruling pertains to an application by way of Notice of Motion dated 20th January 2025 by the applicant through Lagat Joshua and Company Advocates for principally, that this Honourable Court be pleased to call into this Honourable Court, Kabiyet Magistrate’s Court Case number E027 of 2024 for purpose of transferring the same to this Honourable Court for hearing and determination.
2. The application is founded upon the grounds which include;(a)The applicant instituted a suit against the respondents to be declared to have acquired adverse possession of 5. 75 acres of the suit land parcel known as Nandi/Kebuloni.(b)During the pendency of the said proceedings the Court of Appeal in Nairobi Civil Application E41 of 2022 rendered a judgment to the effect that issues adverse possession is the Environment and Land Court.
3. Mr Lagat learned counsel for the applicant has implored the court to allow the application
4. The application is not opposed by Mr Choge learned counsel for the respondents.
5. The application was commenced under Section 1A,1B,3. 3A, section 11,12,15 and 18(e of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 51 Rule 1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, section 17,38 of the Limitation of Actions Act, Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya 21010 and I bear in mind the same.
6. I have duly considered the application in entirety. This court is guided by the Court of Appeal decision in Sugawara v Kiruti (Sued in her capacity as the administratrix of the Estate of Mutarakwa Kiruti Lepaso alias Mutarakwa Kiruti Lepaso alias Mutaragwa Kiroti Leposo and in her own Capacity & 3 others (2024) eKLR on jurisdiction over adverse possession claims and the Supreme Court of Kenya decision in Republic v Karisa Chengo & 2 others (2017) eKLR on jurisdiction generally. So, I find the application firm and meritorious.
7. Wherefore, the application be and is hereby allowed in terms of orders 3 sought in the application as stated in paragraph 1 hereinabove thus, the entire application is thereby disposed of.
8. It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT KAPSABET THIS 6TH DAY OF MAY 2025. G M A ONGONDOJUDGEPresent;Mr Lagat learned counsel for the applicantMr Choge learned counsel for the respondentsMr Walter Kipkorir, court assistant