Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedEnvironment & Land Case 61 of 2017· [2023] KEELC 20673 (KLR)

Muburi & 2 others (Suing as the administrators of the Estate of Teresa Kirangari Muburi) v First Credit Exchange Development Limited

Environment and Land Court
12 October 2023
3,110 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiffs, administrators of the estate of Teresa Kirangari Muburi, filed an Originating Summons dated 2nd October 2015 seeking a declaration that the deceased was the lawful owner of LR No 1144/846 (grant registered as IR 37496/1) and discharge of a charge dated 15th August 1990 registered in favour of First Credit Exchange Development Limited, which had secured a Kshs 80,000 loan. The deceased repaid the loan in full, and by a letter dated 30th November 1995 the defendant's advance manager, Harrison Kioko, directed the Ministry of Lands to discharge the property, but the discharge was never effected. A 2015 search revealed the charge still subsisted, and the defendant had ceased operations and could not be traced, including at the Company Registry. After the deceased's death, the legal representatives were joined and substituted and the suit revived. The defendant was served by substituted service (advertisement in the Daily Nation of 12 June 2023) but did not enter appearance. The court, relying on authority that uncontroverted evidence must still be interrogated, found the affidavit evidence and documents sufficient: the deceased was the registered owner, the loan was repaid, and under Section 85(1) of the Land Act, 2012 the chargor is entitled to discharge upon repayment. Following Sammy Njoroge Mwangi v Regional Loans Building Society, the court held that leaving the charge subsisting where the chargee is untraceable would create unnecessary hardship to the right of redemption. The Originating Summons was allowed: ownership was declared, the charge discharged, the Deputy Registrar authorised to sign the discharge documents, and costs awarded to the plaintiffs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Ownership of the suit land

Holding

The deceased was the registered owner of LR No 1144/846, evidenced by the certificate of grant registered as IR 37496/1

Reasoning

The affidavit evidence of the co-administrator, together with the certificate of grant showing registration of the grant in the deceased's name and the registered charge, established ownership. The certificate of title is conclusive evidence of proprietorship under Section 26(1) of the Land Registration Act, and the defendant did not controvert this evidence.

p. 6
02

Discharge of the charge dated 15th August 1990

Holding

The charge should be discharged since the loan was repaid in full and the chargee cannot be traced

Reasoning

The letter of 30th November 1995 from the defendant's advance manager confirmed full repayment and requested discharge. Section 85(1) of the Land Act entitles a chargor to discharge upon repayment. Leaving the charge subsisting where the chargee cannot be traced would create unnecessary hardship to the right of redemption, as in Sammy Njoroge Mwangi v Regional Loans Building Society.

p. 7
03

Signing of discharge documents by the Deputy Registrar

Holding

The Deputy Registrar should sign all documents necessary to discharge the charge

Reasoning

The defendant failed to enter appearance and could not be traced despite reasonable efforts, including substituted service by advertisement in the Daily Nation and searches at the Company Registry. Justice demands that the Deputy Registrar sign the discharge documents in place of the unavailable chargee.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • Upon payment of all monies secured by a charge and performance of all obligations, the chargor is entitled to discharge of the charge
  • Uncontroverted evidence does not automatically prove a case; the plaintiff must still discharge the burden of proof

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Teresa Kirangari Muburi of P.O Box 28483-00200 Nairobi is declared the owner of the property known as IR Number 37496/1
  2. 2.The charge dated 15.8.1990 registered against LR No 1144/846 as defined in the grant registered as IR Number 37496/1 in favour of First Credit Exchange Development Limited is discharged
  3. 3.The Deputy Registrar of the Court shall sign all documents necessary to discharge the charge and give effect to the orders
  4. 4.The Plaintiffs shall have costs of the suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Registration ActSection 26(1)
  • Evidence Act (Cap 180)Section 97(1)
  • Land Act, 2012Section 85(1)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 40(1)
  • Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21)Section 27

Cases cited (6)

  • Twiga Chemical Industries Limited v Allan Stephen Reynolds
    NRB CA Civil Appeal No 300 of 2006 [2014]

    Importance of Section 97 of the Evidence Act on documents ascertaining intentions

  • National Bank of Kenya Limited v Pipeplastic Samkolit (K) Limited and another
    NRB CA Civil Appeal No 95 of 1999 [2001] eKLR

    Clause 5 of charge - discharge of chargor's property upon payment of loan

  • Propwa Company Limited v Justus Nyamo Gatondo & another
    [2020] eKLR

    Court must interrogate unchallenged plaintiff's evidence; ex parte evidence is not automatic proof

  • Kenya Power & Lighting Company Limited v Nathan Karanja Gachoka & another
    [2016] eKLR

    Uncontroverted evidence must still be interrogated; plaintiff must prove case on balance of probability

  • Gichinga Kibutha v Caroline Nduku
    (2018) eKLR

    Claimant must discharge burden of proof even where opponent does not appear

  • Sammy Njoroge Mwangi v Regional Loans Building Society
    [2018] eKLR

    Discharge of charge where chargee untraceable; subsisting charge creates hardship on right of redemption

Jurisdiction invoked
Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over charges and interests in land (Article 162(2) Constitution); suit by Originating Summons dated 2nd October 2015

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Muburi & 2 others (Suing as the administrators of the Estate of Teresa Kirangari Muburi) v First Credit Exchange Development Limited", Case Analysis (2023). Environment & Land Case 61 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/20673/eng@2023-10-12

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