Majimoto Group Ranch & 10 others v Matunke & 14 others; Sankale & 4 others (Interested Parties) (Petition 268 of 2017) [2022] KEELC 3602 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court revoked titles fraudulently grabbed from a group ranch, upheld newly elected officials, and ordered former leaders to account for Kshs. 13 million in community funds.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Locus standi of the Petitioners
The Petitioners, as members of the group ranch and duly elected officials, had locus under Articles 22 and 258 of the Constitution
Evidence from the Registrar of Group Ranches confirmed the Petitioners' membership and due election. No evidence showed they were party to the JR proceedings relied upon, nor that interim orders therein were extended or confirmed. A threat to the constitutional right to property under Article 40 justified constitutional intervention, and Article 162(2)(b) conferred jurisdiction on the ELC.
Dissolution and elections
Majimoto Group Ranch was never dissolved and the elections of 13th December 2016 were legal and proper
Section 13 of the LGRA prescribes a mandatory procedure for dissolution - written application signed by a majority of representatives, supported by minutes, delivered within 14 days, and a certificate from the Registrar. No such evidence was led. The Registrar testified dissolution never occurred. With 60% member turnout, the elections were conducted lawfully and the resultant certificate is proper.
Grabbed public utilities
Public utility land was illegally and unprocedurally acquired with the help of the group ranch officials; the titles must be revoked
The Ministry of Lands investigation report, undisputed, listed public properties privately acquired; certified green cards confirmed registrations such as schools and town centres in private names. Claims of holding titles 'in trust' were rejected for want of trust instruments or minutes. Section 26 of the Land Registration Act permits impeachment of titles obtained fraudulently or unprocedurally.
Illegal and unprocedural land allocation
The amendment of the primary register was void; extra shares without transfer documents stand revoked; allocations to fictitious persons are illegal and revoked
DW1 admitted he had no authority to amend the register and knew a two-thirds majority was required but was not obtained. The 1st Respondent owned eleven parcels yet produced no agreements or transfers, his 'cows as consideration' explanation being disbelieved. Fictitious conjoined names such as 'Pashamai Ole Matunke' were confirmed used to acquire extra parcels.
Misappropriation of community funds
Lease revenues from the community investments belong to the community and must be accounted for; the officials' claim of private ownership failed
The leases predated the 1st Respondent's chairmanship and were entered into by the group ranch as a legal entity. The privatization of the leased land occurred during the officials' tenure and for their benefit without members' consent. As the leases were never amended to reflect new owners, the rental monies belong in the Majimoto Group Ranch KCB account.
Privatization of Olarro Camp/Conservancy
The title to Olarro issued to eight individuals including the former chairman, secretary and treasurer was illegal and stands revoked
Section 8 of Cap 287 and the ranch constitution require group representatives to hold land and assets for the collective benefit of all members. DW1 and DW2 confirmed the parcel belonged to the community, and no minutes of an AGM or member resolution sanctioned the transfer to the eight individuals.
Legal principles established
#- A group ranch can only be dissolved through the procedure in section 13 of the Land (Group Representatives) Act, and in the absence of such compliance dissolution did not occur
- Amendments to a group ranch primary register without the requisite majority approval and statutory procedure are illegal, unprocedural and void
- Indefeasibility of title cannot shield persons who acquire public land illegally, unprocedurally or by fraud
- Interim orders are not issued in perpetuity and lapse unless extended or converted into final orders
Court orders
#- 1.Order requiring the 1st to 10th Respondents to render a full and true account of all funds received and all assets of Majimoto Group Ranch being Kshs. 13,014,288/-
- 2.Failure to render accounts within 60 days, judgment entered against the 1st to 10th Respondents jointly and severally for Kshs. 13,014,288/- with interest from date of filing suit
- 3.Order to the 1st to 10th Respondents to hand over to the Petitioners moneys due, and all books, papers and other property of the group within 30 days
- 4.Order compelling the District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer (12th Respondent) to regularize allocation of parcels to entitled owners in accordance with the original Members List
- 5.Order to the 15th Respondent for preparation of title documents for unregistered public utilities, to be submitted to the 11th Respondent for registration in favour of Majimoto Group Ranch
- 6.Order to the District Land Registrar Narok (11th Respondent) to revoke titles to public and communal properties including CIS Mara/Majimoto/2171, 2078, 2076, 2077, 2086, 461, 2165, 654, 2749 and 730; failing which they stand revoked after 14 days and land reverts to Majimoto Group Ranch
- 7.Order to the 1st-10th Respondents to surrender title documents for irregularly allocated parcels (except Ngoswani) within 30 days, failing which titles stand revoked and the 11th Respondent to effect revocation in the green cards; extra shares without transfer instruments stand revoked
- 8.Permanent injunction against the 1st to 10th Respondents from representing themselves as officials of Majimoto Group Ranch; elections of 13th December 2016 and the certificate dated 14th December 2016 upheld
- 9.Transactions and titles of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Interested Parties upheld
- 10.Transaction and title of the 5th Interested Party's parcel upheld
- 11.Titles of the 4th Interested Party over CIS-Mara/Majimoto/86, 895, 1105, 1345, 1349 and 2257 upheld
- 12.Order to the 11th Respondent to revoke the 4th Interested Party's titles CIS-Mara/Majimoto/1597, 1227, 798 and 88 and issue titles to the rightful allottees per the primary register and allocation/area list
- 13.Each party to bear their own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 - disputes relating to the environment and the use and occupation of, and title to land
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Shivji & another v Land Registrar Narok & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E015 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 5234 (KLR)[2026] KEELC 5234 (KLR)6 Aug 2026
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Majimoto Group Ranch & 10 others v Matunke & 14 others; Sankale & 4 others (Interested Parties) (Petition 268 of 2017) [2022] KEELC 3602 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Petition and Amended Petition filed 16th March 2017 / Amended 11th July 2017 (ELC Petition, Migori). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/3602/eng@2022-07-08
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.