Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedCivil Appeal No 191 of 2013· [2017] KEELC 3506 (KLR)

Seth Mbithe Kioko v Bernard Wambua [2017] KEELC 3506 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
3 March 2017
1,206 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed a magistrate had power to correct her own mistaken land order, so the appeal failed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This appeal arose from the Chief Magistrate's Court at Machakos. On 11th December, 2012, the lower court allowed the Appellant's application directing the District Land Registrar to issue her a Title Deed for parcel Mitaboni/Mutituni/1423 and reinstating the boundary between parcels 1376 and 1423. On the Respondent's review application, the same court set aside those orders on 20th September, 2013, and the Appellant appealed, contending that the Magistrate disregarded the Land Disputes Tribunal's Award, the Confirmation of Grant and the report of Surveyor Getrude K. Ngumbi. The appeal was disposed of by written submissions. The court noted that the Tribunal's Award in Case No. 1 of 2005, adopted as judgment in Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 60 of 2006, had merely directed the Machakos District Surveyor to reinstate the common boundary of parcel 1376 as fixed during demarcation; it never found that parcels 1376 and 1423 share a boundary. The surveyor's report and sketch showed that none of the neighbouring plots to 1376 is 1423 and that parcel 1376 lies on sheet number 11. Under Section 7(2) of the repealed Land Disputes Tribunal Act, the Magistrate's court could only enter judgment in accordance with the Tribunal's Award. The court held it was erroneous for the Magistrate to have found a boundary between the two parcels, and that she correctly set aside her own order made in error on the face of the record. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the orders of 11th December, 2012 accorded with the Tribunal's Award as adopted as judgment

Holding

They did not. The Tribunal only ordered reinstatement of the common boundary of parcel 1376 and surrounding parcels as fixed during demarcation; it never found that 1376 and 1423 share a boundary, and the surveyor's report showed no such common boundary.

Reasoning

The court perused the Tribunal's Award and the surveyors' reports filed in the lower court. The Award directed the Machakos District Surveyor to reinstate the common boundary of parcel 1376 as fixed during demarcation; it did not state that 1376 had a common boundary with 1423. The surveyor's sketch showed that none of 1376's neighbouring plots is 1423, and that parcel 1376 appears on sheet number 11. It was therefore erroneous for the Magistrate to hold that a boundary existed between the two parcels.

p. 3
02

Whether the lower court rightly reviewed and set aside its own order of 11th December, 2012

Holding

Yes. Having realised the error on the face of the record, the Magistrate correctly set aside the order in the Ruling of 20th September, 2013.

Reasoning

The order of 11th December, 2012 directed the Land Registrar to issue a Title Deed for parcel 1423 on the assumption that it bordered parcel 1376. That assumption was contradicted by the Tribunal's Award and the joint surveyor's reports, which placed the parcels on different sheet maps. The error was apparent on the face of the record, so the Magistrate was entitled to correct it by setting the order aside.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Under Section 7(2) of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed), the Magistrate's court could only enter judgment in accordance with the Tribunal's Award and issue a decree thereon executable under the Civil Procedure Act
  • A court may set aside its own order made in error on the face of the record where the order does not accord with the underlying judgment or award

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Appellant's Appeal is dismissed
  2. 2.The Appellant to pay costs of the Appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Disputes Tribunal Act (repealed)Section 7(2)
  • Civil Procedure ActNot specified (execution of decrees)
On appeal from
Chief Magistrate's Court (lower court, Machakos)
Ruling delivered in the lower court on 20th September, 2013 (arising from Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 60 of 2006)
Jurisdiction invoked
Appellate jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over appeals from the Magistrates' Court on land matters

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Seth Mbithe Kioko v Bernard Wambua [2017] KEELC 3506 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Civil Appeal No 191 of 2013. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/3506/eng@2017-03-03

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