Awino & another v Chege & 3 others (Environment & Land Case E010 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 1232 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court cancelled a fraudulent land subdivision and transfer, returning Ngong family land to the widow and son of the deceased registered owner.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the deceased was the registered owner of the suit land
Yes - the certified copy of title deed dated 26th September 1990 in the deceased's name is prima facie evidence of ownership, and no evidence was adduced to controvert it
The court relied on Section 26(1) of the Land Registration Act, which renders a certificate of title prima facie evidence that the named proprietor is the absolute and indefeasible owner. The certified title deed dated 26th September 1990 named the deceased as owner. None of the Defendants adduced any evidence to rebut the presumption, so it stood.
Whether the transfer and subdivision of the suit land to the 1st and 2nd Defendants was legal
No - both the transfer and the subdivision were illegal, unprocedural and null and void
The land was still charged to Barclays Bank and had not been discharged, so it could not lawfully be transferred. The registered owner was deceased and transfer could only have been effected by his lawful legal representatives. Statutorily required instruments (Land Control Board consent, valuation, stamp duty, transfer forms) were absent from the Registrar's records despite ample opportunity to produce them, and the absence of Land Control Board consent rendered the transactions void under Section 6 of the Land Control Act.
Legal principles established
#- A certificate of title is prima facie evidence that the person named as proprietor is the absolute and indefeasible owner, and this presumption is not displaced where no evidence is adduced to rebut it
- Under Section 6 of the Land Control Act, subdivision or transfer of agricultural land without Land Control Board consent is void for all purposes
- Land cannot lawfully be transferred while still charged to a bank until the charge is discharged
- Unchallenged and uncontroverted evidence stands where the defendant offers no evidence
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the Plaintiffs against all the Defendants jointly and severally as per prayers (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) of the plaint dated 3rd February, 2022
- 2.A declaration that the sub-division of L.R. No. Ngong/Ngong/7975 and subsequent allocation and registration to the 1st and 2nd Defendants without the consent and/or authority of the Plaintiffs was illegal and fraudulent (prayer (a))
- 3.A permanent injunction against the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their agents or assignees, restraining them from dealing with, further transferring or trespassing on the suit land (prayer (b))
- 4.An order to the 3rd Defendant to revoke and cancel all entries in the register of the suit land that contravene the proprietary rights and interests of the Plaintiffs (prayer (c))
- 5.Cancellation of all entries resulting in titles issued from the subdivision of L.R. 7975 (prayer (d))
- 6.Restoration of the Plaintiffs as the legitimate and bonafide owners of the suit land (prayer (e))
- 7.Costs of the suit to the Plaintiffs (prayer (f))
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction over a land dispute (Environment and Land Court); no specific constitutional/statutory provision invoked in the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Awino & another v Chege & 3 others (Environment & Land Case E010 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 1232 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided (Plaint dated 3rd February, 2022). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/1232/eng@2025-03-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.