Basil & another v Njendu; Safari Leisure Motels Limited & 2 others (Third party) (Environment & Land Case 1 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 4073 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court in Voi struck down a 1999 caveat blocking a property sale, ruling caveats can't block owners forever.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of the caveat registered on 8th April 1999 by Kamau Njendu against LR No. 13909/12
The caveat is invalid, null and void.
The court found that the Defendant did not tender evidence of any registrable interest in the land as required under Section 57(1) of the repealed Registration of Titles Act. The Land Registrar testified he could not have registered the caveat and neither the Defendant nor the Registrar could produce the application made before registration. The court distinguished the prior ruling in MSA HCCC No. 253 of 2002 (OS) as it did not involve the Plaintiffs, was not subjected to trial, and predated the 2016 sale agreement. The caveat was found to have been lodged without lawful basis.
Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to removal of the caveat and registration of the transfer
Yes – the caveat should be removed and the transfer registered.
The caveator was duly notified of the intention to remove the caveat but objected. The Land Registrar testified he could not remove the caveat unless directed by the court. The court found the Plaintiffs to be legitimate proprietors and that they had been prejudiced by the unreasonable maintenance of the caveat. The court relied on Boyes v Gathure and Article 40 of the Constitution to find that a caveat is temporary and cannot deprive a proprietor indefinitely.
Third party indemnity claim by the Defendant
Dismissed for lack of evidence.
Although third party proceedings were properly instituted under Order 1 rule 15 CPR and the third parties participated, the Defendant did not lead any evidence against the third parties' actions nor demonstrate how they ought to indemnify him. The court therefore found the third party proceedings fit for dismissal.
Costs
Each party to bear own costs.
Although costs follow the event under Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, the court noted that the suit against the original defendants had been settled and withdrawn, which affected the prayers sought. The court accordingly directed each party to bear own costs of the suit and third party proceedings.
Legal principles established
#- A caveat under Section 57 of the repealed Registration of Titles Act may be registered only where the caveator claims a registrable interest in land and the application and instrument for registration must be produced as evidence.
- A repealed statute continues to govern prior-accrued rights and things duly done under it pursuant to Section 23(3)(b) of the Interpretation and General Provisions Act, Cap 2.
- A caveat is a temporary protective measure and cannot be maintained indefinitely to deprive a proprietor of their right to property.
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration is hereby issued that the Registration of the purported caveat dated 8th April 1999 against LR No. 13909/2 registered as CR No. 25140 (suit premises) is null and void.
- 2.A mandatory injunction be and is hereby issued compelling the Land Registrar/3rd Third Party herein to remove forthwith the said caveat and to register the transfer of the suit premises in favour of the Plaintiffs.
- 3.The third party proceedings herein are hereby dismissed.
- 4.Any other relief not expressly granted is deemed as declined.
- 5.Each party to bear own costs of the suit and third party proceedings.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction over land disputes under the sale agreement dated 23rd September 2016 regarding LR No. 13909/12
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Basil & another v Njendu; Safari Leisure Motels Limited & 2 others (Third party) (Environment & Land Case 1 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 4073 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Suit against Kamau Njendu (4th Defendant) – ELRC/ELC Mombasa Registry (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4073/eng@2025-05-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.