Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in judgment· [2017] KEELC 1499 (KLR)

Roselyne Kimono Osorome v Godfrey Kabirbei Naibei & another [2017] KEELC 1499 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court (High Court), Bungoma
3 October 2017
SMS. Mukunya
195 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Bungoma court ordered trespassers evicted after they failed to defend a land case, showing that ignoring court papers guarantees you lose.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff, owner of land parcel Elgon/Chemoge/704 measuring 1.79 Ha, sued the defendants alleging that they unlawfully interchanged sections of her land during subdivision and thereafter trespassed onto and occupied part of the parcel by erecting structures. Particulars of trespass were pleaded, and the plaintiff produced in evidence a copy of her title deed, a copy of the map of the area and a letter from the area Chief. The defendants, though served with the hearing notice as shown by the return of service on the court file, neither entered appearance nor filed a defence, so the claim proceeded as an undefended (formal proof) suit. The court, per S. Mukunya J, held that the plaintiff's allegations were unchallenged and proved. Judgment was entered for the plaintiff as prayed, with costs to the plaintiff. The defendants were ordered to be evicted from land parcel Elgon/Chemoge/704. The ruling was read in open court at Bungoma and dated 3 October 2017, in the presence of the 2nd defendant, the 1st defendant being recorded as absent/dead. No authorities were cited and no separate opinions were expressed.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the defendants trespassed onto the plaintiff's parcel Elgon/Chemoge/704

Holding

The court found the allegations proved on the unchallenged evidence of the plaintiff, who produced the title deed, a map and a Chief's letter.

Reasoning

The defendants were served with the hearing notice as evidenced by a return of service, but neither entered appearance nor filed a defence. The plaintiff's claim of unlawful interchange of land during subdivision and unlawful occupation through structures therefore went unchallenged, and the court entered judgment as prayed with costs, ordering eviction.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a defendant is served and neither appears nor files a defence, the plaintiff's unchallenged allegations may be taken as proved and judgment entered as prayed.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment entered for the plaintiff as prayed
  2. 2.The defendants to be evicted from land parcel Elgon/Chemoge/704
  3. 3.Costs of the suit to the plaintiff
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the court over land claims (title and trespass)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Roselyne Kimono Osorome v Godfrey Kabirbei Naibei & another [2017] KEELC 1499 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/1499/eng@2017-10-03

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