Peter Kim Baker & another v Sidi Katana Bongo & another [2017] KEELC 1335 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The court cancelled two Kilifi land titles bought from a deceased man's estate, ruling the buyers could not claim innocent purchaser protection because occupants were clearly living on the land.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of the sale of Plot 1113 by the late Mzee Masha
No valid sale; the plot was fraudulently transferred to the Plaintiffs
The Defendants proved by death certificate that Mzee Masha died on 23rd June 2009, before the alleged agreement of 1st September 2009. The burden then shifted to the Plaintiffs to show he was alive on that date, but they failed to call the witnessing advocate or produce contrary proof. The agent's sporadic payments to family members from purchase price money confirmed the fraud.
Validity of the transfer of Plot 1114 to the two sons and its sale to the Plaintiffs
The transfer to the sons was fraudulent and unregistered; the Plaintiffs were not innocent purchasers
No succession proceedings evidenced the transfer from Mzee Masha to his two sons; the transfer document was never registered, the signing date unknown, and the consent of the 1st Defendant, the wife living on the land, was never obtained. The Plaintiffs knew or ought to have known of the Defendants' occupation and of the land's prior ownership, so they were on notice and should have made further inquiries.
Whether the Plaintiffs were innocent purchasers for value without notice
They were not, because they knew or ought to have known of the Defendants' occupation and the prior ownership before purchasing
Before entering the agreement the Plaintiffs knew or ought to have known that the Defendants were living on Plot 1114 and that the land initially belonged to Mzee Masha. They were thus put on inquiry and should have made further investigations; failure to do so disqualifies them from protection as bona fide purchasers.
Legal principles established
#- A purchaser who knows or ought to know of occupation of the land by third parties before purchase is not an innocent purchaser for value without notice
Court orders
#- 1.Permanent injunction restraining the Plaintiffs, their servants, employees, agents or anybody acting through them from interfering with the Defendants' occupation of parcels Kilifi/Mtondia/1113 and Kilifi/Mtondia/1114
- 2.Order to the Kilifi Land Registrar to cancel the Title Deeds issued to the Plaintiffs in respect of Kilifi/Mtondia 1113 and 1114 and replace them with the names of Katana Bongo Masha (deceased)
- 3.Order to the Kilifi Land Registrar to rectify the register by cancelling the entries transferring the suit properties to the Plaintiffs
- 4.Plaintiffs to pay the costs of the suit and the Counter-Claim
- Jurisdiction invoked
- original civil jurisdiction over land disputes (Environment and Land Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Peter Kim Baker & another v Sidi Katana Bongo & another [2017] KEELC 1335 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/1335/eng@2017-05-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.