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· [2018] KEELC 2214 (KLR)

Aibu Wanjeche Sikulu v Daniel Wanjala & another [2018] KEELC 2214 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court (High Court of Kenya)
17 July 2018
MOM.A Odeny
1,198 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

#

A Kenyan court ruled that a registered landowner's title is absolute and ordered his nephews, who had no legal claim, off his land within 30 days.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a plaint dated 15th November 2007, amended on 6th February 2018, the plaintiff sued his nephews seeking eviction, a permanent injunction and costs in respect of parcel KAKAMEGA/SANGO/191 measuring approximately 15 acres, which he purchased in 1974. He pleaded that the defendants and their late mother were accommodated on the land on humanitarian grounds after the mother was chased from her matrimonial home around 1987; she died in 1991, and the defendants refused to return to their father, who owns alternative land at Moi's Bridge and Soy Sambu in Tongaren. The defendants entered appearance but filed no defence and did not attend the hearing, which proceeded ex parte. Counsel for the plaintiff framed three issues: eviction, injunction and costs. Relying on sections 25(1) and 26(1) of the Land Registration Act, 2012, he submitted that the plaintiff's registered title is absolute and indefeasible absent fraud, and that the defendants became trespassers upon notice to vacate. The court held that registration as proprietor confers prima facie absolute rights unless fraudulent acquisition is proved, that the defendants abused the humanitarian hospitality extended to their late mother, and that they are trespassers with no legal claim to the land. It granted a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful enjoyment of the land, ordered them to vacate the parcel within 30 days failing which an eviction order would issue, and awarded costs of the suit to the plaintiff.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the plaintiff, as registered proprietor, proved his entitlement to eviction and a permanent injunction

Holding

Yes - the plaintiff proved ownership by title and that the defendants are trespassers with no legal claim

Reasoning

The plaintiff produced a title to KAKAMEGA/SANGO/191, purchased in 1974. Under sections 25(1) and 26(1) of the Land Registration Act his title is prima facie absolute and indefeasible absent proof of fraud or misrepresentation. The defendants were accommodated on humanitarian grounds after their mother was chased from her matrimonial home; after her death they abused that hospitality by refusing to move to their father, who has alternative land. They filed no defence and did not attend the hearing. Their continued occupation after notice made them trespassers, justifying eviction and a permanent injunction.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Registration of a person as owner of land is prima facie evidence of absolute rights unless acquisition by fraud is proved

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The defendants are permanently restrained by way of an injunction from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful enjoyment of the suit land
  2. 2.The defendants to vacate parcel No. KAKAMEGA/SANGO/191 within 30 days, failure of which an eviction order to issue
  3. 3.The defendants to pay costs of the suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Registration Actsection 25(1)
  • Land Registration Actsection 26(1)
  • Land Registration Actsection 28 (referred to within section 25 quote)

Cases cited (2)

  • David Ngoge Alfons v Joshua Monyancha Kiyondi
    [2014] eKLR
  • Paul Cheruiyot Chepkonga v David Kimeto Kiptabus
    [2017] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil suit by plaint under the Land Registration Act, 2012 (not expressly stated in the judgment)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Aibu Wanjeche Sikulu v Daniel Wanjala & another [2018] KEELC 2214 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/2214/eng@2018-07-17

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