Vincent Narisa Krop & 3 others v Martin Semero Limakou & 12 others [2020] KEELC 2210 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that the Minister's land adjudication decision is final, can only be challenged within six months, and the registered owners are entitled to evict the occupants.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Competence of Kitale ELC 93 of 2018 to challenge the Minister's decision
The suit is incompetent as it amounts to an appeal against the Minister's final decision, which is not provided for; judicial review was the only mechanism and the six-month limitation period had expired.
The court held that the Minister's decision under Section 29 of the Land Adjudication Act is final. The defendants' grievance focused on the procedure of the District Commissioner's hearing, which could only be addressed through judicial review. That had to be filed within six months under Section 9(3) of the Law Reform Act and Order 53 Rule 2; the decision was made on 5/4/2012 and no such application was filed by 4/10/2012. Framing the claim as an ordinary declaratory suit to achieve the effect of certiorari would circumvent mandatory limitation provisions, and the suit bore no reasonable cause of action and was an abuse of process.
Res judicata vis-à-vis Kitale HC Misc. Appl. No 43 of 2000
Not res judicata, since that application was dismissed for want of prosecution and was not heard on its merits.
The Attorney General argued that Kitale ELC 93 of 2018 was res judicata Kitale HC Misc. Appl. No 43 of 2000. The court found that the earlier judicial review application seeking prohibition of the Minister's hearing was dismissed for want of prosecution on 10/11/2009 without a determination on the merits, so it could not found a plea of res judicata.
Whether an eviction order should issue against the defendants
Yes. The plaintiffs' title, obtained by transmission after the adjudication process, is protected under Sections 24 and 26 of the Land Registration Act and has not been challenged on grounds of fraud or illegality.
The court found that the plaintiffs are the registered proprietors having acquired the land through transmission from their late father, whose title arose from the adjudication process. No fraud, misrepresentation or corrupt scheme was proved. The defendants were served and attended the hearing before the District Commissioner, knew of the award, and did not file judicial review in time. Without an order quashing the Minister's decision, their occupation is unlawful and the claim for eviction is merited.
Legal principles established
#- The Minister's decision under Section 29 of the Land Adjudication Act is final and can only be corrected through judicial review, which must be filed within six months under Section 9(3) of the Law Reform Act.
- A registered proprietor's title under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act is prima facie absolute and indefeasible, subject to challenge only on grounds of fraud, misrepresentation or illegality.
Court orders
#- 1.Civil Suit No Kitale ELC 93 of 2018 is hereby dismissed.
- 2.The defendants, their agents and/or servants shall within 90 days remove themselves from part of LR No. West Pokot/Chepareria/716 and in default be forcibly evicted.
- 3.A permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents and/or servants from trespassing upon the plaintiffs' parcel of land.
- 4.The defendants to pay the plaintiffs the costs of the consolidated suit.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and the Environment and Land Court Act, original jurisdiction (not stated expressly in extract)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Vincent Narisa Krop & 3 others v Martin Semero Limakou & 12 others [2020] KEELC 2210 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Kitale ELC No. 118 of 2013 (Lead file); Consolidated with Kitale ELC No. 93 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/2210/eng@2020-05-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.