Mangi & another v Naaman (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E019 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 1493 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Mombasa court ruled that people who openly occupy land for over 12 years can win legal ownership from the registered owner.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiffs proved adverse possession of the suit property
Yes. The Plaintiffs were in actual, open, continuous and uninterrupted possession from 1996 (1st Plaintiff) and 1935 (2nd Plaintiff), far exceeding the 12-year statutory period, to the exclusion of the registered owner whose only development was a perimeter wall
The court applied Sections 7, 13 and 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act and the Kimani Ruchure and Gabriel Mbui tests. The site visit confirmed old permanent and semi-permanent structures, families living on the land, and Giriama graves. The Defendant never used or occupied the land. Even counting from his alleged 2017-2018 evictions, the 12-year period was met. The Plaintiffs' claim succeeded.
Whether the Defendant proved his Counter-Claim for eviction, injunction, damages for trespass and mesne profits
No. The Defendant's title was extinguished by operation of law and the trespass claim could not stand after extinguishment; the claim was also caught by laches
The Defendant produced no evidence linking the Plaintiffs to the prior litigation over the land, called no neighbours, chief, surveyor or registrar, and himself admitted the Plaintiffs' permanent houses predated his perimeter wall. Having slept on his rights while the Plaintiffs possessed the land adversely for over 12 years, his Counter-Claim failed and was dismissed with costs.
Costs of the suit and Counter-Claim
Costs follow the event; the Plaintiffs, having succeeded on both the Originating Summons and the defence to the Counter-Claim, were awarded costs
Under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, costs are discretionary and ordinarily follow the event. Since the Plaintiffs prevailed on their claim and defeated the Counter-Claim, both sets of costs were awarded to them and borne by the Defendant.
Legal principles established
#- Adverse possession is established by actual, open, continuous and non-permissive occupation of registered land to the exclusion of the registered owner for the statutory period of 12 years, whereupon the owner's title is extinguished
- A party who seeks to rely on the existence of facts bears the burden of proving those facts
- Possession to found adverse possession must be nec vi, nec clam, nec precario - no force, no secrecy, no persuasion
- Rights acquired under the limitation of actions are overriding interests under Section 28(h) of the Land Registration Act
Court orders
#- 1.The Originating Summons dated 23rd February, 2022 succeeds in its entirety and is allowed with costs
- 2.The Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim dated 24th April, 2023 is found to lack merit and dismissed in its entirety with costs
- 3.The Respondent's interests in Plot Sub-Division No. 4098 (Original No. 3241/53/III/MN) are extinguished
- 4.A survey and subdivision of the portions occupied by the Plaintiffs to be done for their registration as owners jointly and severally by adverse possession
- 5.The Land Registrar Mombasa to issue title documents for the portions occupied by the Plaintiffs
- 6.The orders be registered against the title in terms of Section 38(2) of the Limitation of Actions Act
- 7.Costs of the Originating Summons and Counter-Claim awarded to the Plaintiffs and borne by the Defendant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2) of the Constitution, Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act, No. 19 of 2011 and Section 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act, Cap. 22
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mangi & another v Naaman (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E019 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 1493 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELC No. 19 of 2022 (OS). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/1493/eng@2025-03-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.