Charo & another v Nzaro & 6 others (Environment & Land Petition E007 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 1123 (KLR)

Relying on the Court of Appeal's decision in Amarnath v Kazungu, the court accepted that Section 29 of the Land Adjudication Act renders the Minister's decision final and Section 30 ousts the court's jurisdiction over interests in land in an adjudication section. The petition, seeking to reverse registration created by the adjudication process, could not be re-opened except through judicial review. The court accepted the 1st respondent's submission that the petition's reliefs were, in substance, judicial review and civil suit reliefs that would otherwise be time-barred.

The court adopted the Mukisa Biscuit test as reiterated by the Court of Appeal in Andrew Maina Githinji: the objection must raise a pure point of law, all facts pleaded by the other side must be correct, and there must be no fact needing ascertainment. Jurisdiction, limitation and res judicata qualify as such points.

The 1st respondent relied on Chembe Katana Changi, holding that a challenge to the Minister's decision should have been brought within twelve months under the Government Proceedings Act, and on Njue Ngai as applied in Kefa Were, that a time-barred suit remains defeated however renewed. The court accepted that the petitioners chose the petition route to evade limitation, and found the jurisdictional objection dispositive.