Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedKisumu ELC Case ( plaint dated 20th June 2015, filed 29th June 2015 )· [2017] KEELC 750 (KLR)

Joseph Omollo Odam & Richard Omolo & another (suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Konel Odam Omollo (Deceased) v Jill Awino Odingo & 11 others [2017] KEELC 750 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
29 November 2017
880 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to strike out a land claim, ruling that buyers of subdivided land can still be sued over disputes tied to the original parcel.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a notice of motion dated 2nd May 2017, the 6th Defendant, Nicholas Randa Owano Ombija, sought to have the Plaintiffs' plaint struck out with costs. He argued that he purchased land parcel Kisumu/Konya/3482 from the 1st Defendant for valuable consideration and, under Section 39(1) of the repealed Registered Land Act, was not obliged to inquire into prior transactions over the land; he further contended that the Plaintiffs had disclosed no cause of action and that he had since sold the land to a third party not joined to the suit. The Plaintiffs, Joseph Omollo Odam (administrator of the estate of Konel Odam Omolo) and Richard Omollo Oyoo, opposed the application, deponing that the original parcel Kisumu/Konya/817 was fraudulently transferred in its entirety to the 1st Defendant, who subdivided it into twelve parcels and transferred ten to other Defendants; they also alleged forgery of the signature of the deceased registered proprietor, and the 2nd Plaintiff pleaded adverse possession of 2.5 acres. The court, in a ruling delivered by S.M. Kibunja, Judge, on 29th November 2017, held that the 1st Plaintiff's capacity was unchallenged given his Grant Ad Litem, that the 2nd Plaintiff could sue in his own name on his adverse possession claim, and that the plaint disclosed a cause of action against the 6th Defendant as a recipient of a subdivided portion of the original parcel. The application was dismissed with costs, with the suit to proceed to full hearing on the merits.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action against the 6th Defendant

Holding

The court found a cause of action was established and the suit should proceed to full hearing

Reasoning

The 6th Defendant acquired one of the parcels (Kisumu/Konya/3482) subdivided from the original parcel 817 and contended, under Section 39(1) of the repealed Registered Land Act, that he was a bona fide purchaser for value without duty to inquire. The court held that the pleadings, particularly paragraphs 14 to 27 of the plaint, disclosed a cause of action against him as a recipient of subdivided land, and that it was fair and just the suit be decided on merit rather than struck out.

p. 2
02

Capacity of the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs to sue

Holding

Both Plaintiffs had capacity; the objection to the 2nd Plaintiff's capacity had no merit

Reasoning

The 1st Plaintiff sued as administrator of his late father's estate with a Grant Ad Litem issued in Kisumu H.C. Probate and Administration Cause No.185 of 2015, and his capacity was not contested. The 2nd Plaintiff sued in his own name, with paragraph 27 of the plaint grounding his claim on adverse possession of 2.5 acres. The 6th Defendant's objection was not based on the pleadings and therefore failed.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A plaintiff claiming adverse possession may sue in his own name even where the basis of the objection to his capacity is not founded on the pleadings
  • A transferee of a portion of subdivided land carved out of the original parcel is a proper party against whom a cause of action is disclosed

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 2nd May 2017 by the 6th Defendant seeking to strike out the plaint is dismissed with costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Registered Land Act (repealed)Section 39(1)
Jurisdiction invoked
Environment and Land Court Act, Article 162(2) of the Constitution (land and environment jurisdiction) - the judgment does not expressly state the provision

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Joseph Omollo Odam & Richard Omolo & another (suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Konel Odam Omollo (Deceased) v Jill Awino Odingo & 11 others [2017] KEELC 750 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Kisumu ELC Case ( plaint dated 20th June 2015, filed 29th June 2015 ). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/750/eng@2017-11-29

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.