Kariuki & 2 others (Suing as Registered Trustees of Deliverance Church) v New Age Deverlopers Construction Co Ltd & 8 others (Environment & Land Case 813 of 2015 & 557 of 2016 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 547 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land buyer who paid most of the purchase price won back 29 acres after the court declared the rival titles and bank charge invalid.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Locus standi of the Church trustees
The Church had locus standi and a justifiable cause of action having entered into a sale agreement, paid the bulk of the purchase price and not obtained completion due to the vendor's lost titles and the Defendants' intrusion.
The court defined cause of action by reference to Read v Brown, Letang v Cooper and the Court of Appeal in Attorney General v Andrew Maina Githinji, and found the Church had demonstrated its stake: a sale agreement dated 11th September 2008, payment of Kshs. 6,500,000 deposit and Kshs. 7,275,000 leaving Kshs. 500,000, with completion thwarted by lost title documents and the Defendants' claim to the land.
Validity of the 1st and 2nd Defendants' titles to LR Juja/Komo/block 1/3079 and 1/3080
The titles were invalid; the Defendants failed to demonstrate a lawful root of title.
The court traced the root of the suit land to Mumo Estates Limited, which subdivided it into 94 portions, with Baliga Limited registered over block 1/30. The Defendants were not listed among the shareholders/allottees, produced no sale agreement, transfers, consents or evidence of consideration, and the 1st Defendant admitted no due diligence. Section 26 of the Land Registration Act allows challenge on grounds of fraud or irregular acquisition.
Validity of the 4th Defendant's charge over block 1/3080
The charge was not validly registered and remains invalid.
The bank did not verify the directors or signatories of the borrower, obtained no guarantees, produced an incomplete offer letter, and led no evidence of valuation, pre-search, disbursement or receipt of funds. Since the 1st Defendant's title itself was invalid, there was no valid title to support the charge.
The 1st and 2nd Defendants' Counterclaim
The Counterclaim was not merited and was dismissed; special damages of Kshs. 30,011,508/= were not strictly proved.
A counterclaim must be proved like a suit. The court held that holders of unlawfully obtained titles cannot found a counterclaim, and no receipts or documents were produced for any of the claimed expenditures, so special damages were not proved.
Legal principles established
#- Where two or more competing titles over the same land are claimed, the court must investigate the root of title; a title must conform to procedure and trace its root without a break in the chain.
- A registered proprietor must go beyond the title instrument and prove the legality of the acquisition; indefeasibility under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act does not protect titles acquired through fraud, illegality or irregularity.
- Special damages must be specially pleaded and strictly proved; failure to produce receipts defeats the claim.
- A party challenging a duly registered charge bears a substantial onus, but the charge fails where the bank failed to do due diligence and the borrower held no valid title.
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that properties known as Juja/Komo block 1/30, block 1/31 to 1/40, block 1/3079 and block 1/3080 all measuring 29 acres situate at Ndarugu within the County of Kiambu belongs to the Plaintiffs
- 2.A permanent injunction restraining the Defendants jointly or individually, or through agents, from encroaching onto, trespassing, constructing, selling, offering for sale, transferring, wasting, taking possession of, alienating or disposing of the suit properties
- 3.A mandatory injunction directing the 3rd Defendant to avail the registers for the suit land parcels to facilitate transfer to the Registered Trustees of Deliverance Church
- 4.A declaration that the subdivision of Juja/Komo/block 1/30 into Juja/Komo/block 1/3079 and 1/3080 was unlawful, illegal, null and void
- 5.An order directing the 3rd Defendant to process provisional title deeds for LR Juja/Komo/block 1/30 to facilitate transfer to the Registered Trustees of Deliverance Church
- 6.A declaration that the registration of the charge on 28th May 2015 in favour of the 4th Defendant over Juja/Komo block 1/3080 was unlawful, illegal, null and void and the same be reversed and discharged forthwith
- 7.The 1st and 2nd Defendants' Counterclaim dated 2nd October 2017 dismissed
- 8.Costs of the suit and Counterclaim awarded to the Plaintiffs, payable by the 1st, 2nd and 4th Defendants
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (land and environment disputes)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kariuki & 2 others (Suing as Registered Trustees of Deliverance Church) v New Age Deverlopers Construction Co Ltd & 8 others (Environment & Land Case 813 of 2015 & 557 of 2016 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 547 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Nairobi ELC Case No. 813 of 2015 (lead file), consolidated with Nairobi ELC Case No. 557 of 2016. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/547/eng@2025-02-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.