Khaminwa (Suing as the Lawfully Appointed Administrator of the Estate of Charles Ford Khaminwa & another v Mulama & 6 others (Environment and Land Case E041 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 4488 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that relatives living on family land for decades could not claim ownership because an incomplete land exchange and family ties blocked their adverse possession claim.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Defendants acquired title by adverse possession
Adverse possession was not established; the Defendants' occupation since the 1990s was referable to an incomplete exchange transaction and they are close relatives of the deceased
The court held the alleged exchange transaction never completed: the Defendants' parcel Kakamega/Shitochi/1XX6 remains registered in Mulama Milimu's name and the deceased remained registered proprietor of the suit property since 1982. While parties remain at the contractual stage, time cannot run for adverse possession. Additionally, occupation pursuant to an incomplete sale/exchange is not adverse, and following Samuel Kihamba v Mary Mbaisi, the doctrine does not apply within families against close relatives.
Whether the Plaintiffs, as personal representatives, are entitled to vacant possession
Yes; the estate is protected by Article 40 of the Constitution and Section 24 of the Land Registration Act, and the Plaintiffs have a duty to preserve the estate property
The deceased was the undisputed registered proprietor since 27 May 1982. Registration vests absolute ownership under Section 24 of the Land Registration Act and the right to property is protected under Article 40. As administrators, the Plaintiffs have a duty to preserve the estate and are entitled to vacant possession from the Defendants who admitted occupation. Nothing was proved that the Fifth Defendant died.
Legal principles established
#- Possession alone, however prolonged, does not amount to adverse possession; possession must be hostile and without the proprietor's permission.
- Where parties remain at the contractual stage of a transaction, time does not run in favour of adverse possession.
- Adverse possession does not apply within families against close relatives.
Court orders
#- 1.The Defendants' counterclaim is dismissed
- 2.A declaration that the estate of Charles Ford Khaminwa (deceased) is the legal and beneficial owner of Isukha/Shitochi/9X2 situated in Sigalagala, Kakamega County
- 3.A mandatory injunction requiring the Defendants to remove all illegal structures, crops, cattle and buildings from Isukha/Shitochi/9X2 and vacate and deliver vacant possession to the Plaintiffs within 90 days
- 4.The Defendants to bear the cost of removal of any illegal structures on Isukha/Shitochi/9X2
- 5.A permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from trespassing upon, occupying, accessing or in any manner interfering with the estate's ownership, possession and use of Isukha/Shitochi/9X2
- 6.The Officer Commanding Station, Khayega to ensure law and order is maintained during enforcement of the orders
- 7.Each party to bear own costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land parcel Isukha/Shitochi/9X2 in Kakamega County
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Khaminwa (Suing as the Lawfully Appointed Administrator of the Estate of Charles Ford Khaminwa & another v Mulama & 6 others (Environment and Land Case E041 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 4488 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4488/eng@2025-06-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.