Cheburet (Suing as the administrator of the Estate of Cheburet Tuitoet (Deceased) v County Government of Baringo & 3 others
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court ruled that registered title beats family claims: the Cheburet estate lost Baringo plot 577 and must vacate within 90 days.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the plaintiff established entitlement to plot 577
No; the land is registered in the name of the County Council of Baringo and reserved for Tereben Nursery School.
The green card and certificate of official search showed the County Council of Baringo as first proprietor registered on November 15, 2001. Under section 26 of the Land Registration Act the title is indefeasible, and the plaintiff proved no fraud or misrepresentation to which the title holder was party. The tribunal award of plot 577 was over land not subject to the objection and was properly nullified.
Whether the Land Adjudication Tribunal award of plot 577 conferred rights on the deceased
No; the award was illegal and irregular as plot 577 was not the subject of Objection No 710.
The deceased objected against parcel 107 but was awarded plot 577, which belonged to the County Council of Baringo and was not the subject of the objection. The Principal Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer's letter of April 3, 1992 declaring the award null and void was a proper correction of an obvious illegality.
Whether the deceased was compensated for land donated for Tereben Primary School
Yes; he was allocated plot 462 in Muchongoi Block III Settlement Scheme on September 30, 1998.
DW1 and DW2's evidence established that the deceased and others donated land in 1967 for the primary school, consolidated as plot 107. After the deceased complained, the area chief escalated the matter and the deceased was allocated plot 462 in Muchongoi Settlement Scheme as compensation, so he suffered no injustice.
Costs
Costs follow the event under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act; the plaintiff bears costs of both claim and counterclaim.
Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that costs follow the events unless for good cause the court orders otherwise. Having lost both his claim and faced a successful counterclaim, the plaintiff was ordered to bear the costs of both.
Legal principles established
#- A registered proprietor's title is prima facie and indefeasible under section 26 of the Land Registration Act, challengeable only on fraud, misrepresentation, or illegal/unprocedural/corrupt acquisition.
- An adjudication award over a parcel that was not the subject of the objection is illegal and irregular and may be corrected.
- Burial of family members on disputed land does not confer title or ownership.
Court orders
#- 1.The plaintiff's claim under the plaint dated March 7, 2014 is dismissed with costs.
- 2.The 1st defendant's counterclaim dated July 21, 2016 is allowed.
- 3.A permanent injunction restraining the plaintiff from dealing with, remaining in possession of, or developing Baringo/Kapchomuswa A/577.
- 4.The plaintiff to vacate Baringo/Kapchomuswa A/577 and deliver vacant possession to the 1st defendant within ninety (90) days, in default eviction order to issue.
- 5.The plaintiff to bear the costs of the counterclaim.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land disputes (ELC Case 77 of 2014)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Cheburet (Suing as the administrator of the Estate of Cheburet Tuitoet (Deceased) v County Government of Baringo & 3 others", Case Analysis (2022). Environment & Land Case 77 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/15399/eng@2022-12-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.