Joshua Nyangacha Abonyo & 5 others v Crestina Ogur Got
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal confirmed that a woman who stayed on land after being told to leave in 1983 legally owns eight acres through adverse possession.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the respondent sufficiently established the ingredients of adverse possession with respect to the eight-acre portion of the suit property
- 2.Whether the respondent's initially permissive entry could ripen into adverse possession, i.e. whether the permission was withdrawn
- 3.Whether the disputes before local administrators interrupted or rendered the possession non-peaceful
- 4.Whether the trial court's award of eight acres was supported by sufficient evidence
- 5.Whether the trial court's judgment complied with Order 21 Rules 4 and 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key legal issues
#Ingredients of adverse possession
A claimant must prove actual, open, exclusive, continuous and uninterrupted possession for over twelve years, inconsistent with the registered owner's title.
The Court restated the settled elements from its prior decisions and the Limitation of Actions Act: registration in another's name, open and exclusive adverse possession, and occupation exceeding twelve years with dispossession or discontinuance by the owner. The respondent's decades-long, demarcated occupation satisfied all elements.
Effect of permissive entry and its withdrawal
Possession that begins permissively becomes adverse once the permission is withdrawn and the occupant refuses to vacate; time runs from the refusal.
The Court accepted the appellants' evidence that Petro Got entered with Ojuok Otieno's permission, but held that after his death and burial in 1983 the respondent was asked to vacate and refused. From that point her occupation was in defiance of the owners' asserted rights and adverse, so limitation ran from 1983.
Whether disputes before local administrators interrupt adverse possession
Reports and disputes before chiefs and administrators do not stop time; only legal proceedings or effective re-entry do.
The appellants relied on disputes before area chiefs, district commissioners and the sub-county commissioner. The Court held that no eviction suit or order was ever obtained and there was no re-entry, so time continued to run uninterrupted and the respondent's rights crystallised long before the 2013 suit.
Sufficiency of evidence on acreage
The respondent's consistent claim of eight acres, corroborated by demarcation evidence and the appellants' own admissions, sufficed on a balance of probabilities.
Although the 1st appellant varied his estimate from eight to six acres and the 4th appellant could not estimate acreage, the evidence as a whole confirmed a distinct, identifiable portion bounded by trees and sisal plants occupied by the respondent for decades. The appellants' inability to give a different reliable acreage could not defeat the claim.
Legal principles established
#- Where a permitted occupant is asked to vacate but remains in possession, possession becomes immediately adverse to the registered title holder, and time runs from that point.
- Time under the Limitation of Actions Act ceases to run only when the owner asserts his right by legal proceedings or effective entry into the land.
- A first appellate court must re-evaluate, re-assess and re-analyse the evidence on the record and determine whether the trial court's conclusions stand.
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent
- 2.The judgment and decree of the Environment and Land Court declaring the respondent owner of the eight-acre portion by adverse possession and ordering its transfer to her stands
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- Environment and Land Court at Migori
- ELC Case No. 717 of 2017 (Formerly High Court Civil Case No. 440 of 2013)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the Environment and Land Court (appeal as of right from the judgment and decree below)
- Consolidated with
- Civil Appeal No. 165 of 2020
Relief refused
#Appellants' prayer to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court
The Court found the respondent proved all elements of adverse possession and the appeal lacked merit
Costs
The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Accordingly, the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
We find no error in the learned trial Judge's conclusion that the appellants' title to that portion had been extinguished by operation of law, and that the respondent had acquired title thereto by adverse possession.
Time ceases to run under the Limitation of Actions Act either when the owner asserts his right or when his right is admitted by the adverse possessor.
the moment a permitted occupant defies an order to leave or vacate a suit premise, his possession became immediately adverse to the registered title holder
Issues in the judgment
#Judgment delivery date (2026) post-dates the appeal filing (2020) by six years and appears anomalous on the face of the certified copy.
The respondent is referred to as 'the appellant (PW1)' in the trial evidence narrative, conflating party designations.
Conflicting evidence on the year of Petro Got's death (1975 pleaded; 1981 testified; 1983 per appellants) was not resolved yet 1983 was adopted as the withdrawal date.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Joshua Nyangacha Abonyo & 5 others v Crestina Ogur Got", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Appeal No. 146 of 2020 (consolidated with Civil Appeal No. 165 of 2020). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1982/eng@2026-09-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.