Mahida v Prajapati (Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 4610 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court in Kakamega confirmed you cannot claim rent from a deceased person's property unless you're the estate's legally appointed administrator.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of the preliminary objection on jurisdiction and capacity
The preliminary objection was a valid pure point of law because it was predicated on undisputed facts.
The court applied the Mukisa Biscuits definition and the Supreme Court's pronouncement in Hassan Ali Joho. The questions whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction and whether the appellant had capacity as a non-administrator were based on facts the appellant did not dispute, such as the pendency of the succession cause and his lack of a grant. The objection therefore qualified as a pure point of law.
Jurisdiction of the Rent Restriction Tribunal
The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because there was no landlord-tenant relationship between the parties and the dispute concerned ownership of land pending before the Succession Court.
Section 5 of the Rent Restriction Act confers jurisdiction only where a landlord-tenant relationship exists over dwelling houses. Neither party alleged entering a tenancy agreement with the other; the appellant's claim rested on his alleged registration as proprietor, a title question reserved for the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(2)(b). Further, the Nairobi Succession Cause was already seized of matters of identification and distribution of the estate.
Locus standi of the appellant
The appellant, not being the administrator of the deceased's estate, had no locus standi to sue for rent belonging to the estate.
Sections 3 and 82 of the Law of Succession Act vest the power to sue for the estate exclusively in personal representatives, as restated in Trouistik Union International v Jane Mbeyu. The Succession Court's orders of 2nd June 2021 and 28th July 2021 directed rent be deposited into the deceased's account and limited the appellant to reconciliation duties, so he could not sue to receive rent adjudged as belonging to the estate.
Legal principles established
#- A preliminary objection must raise pure points of law anchored on facts that are not in dispute
- Landlord-tenant relationship is created by agreement and cannot be presumed from a change in ownership of the rented premises
- Only a duly appointed personal representative may sue on behalf of a deceased's estate
- Questions of title to land fall within the jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court, not the Rent Restriction Tribunal, where no landlord-tenant relationship exists
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal dismissed
- 2.Costs of the appeal awarded to the respondent
- On appeal from
- Rent Restriction Tribunal, Kakamega
- Kakamega RRT Case No. E034 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction over decisions of the Rent Restriction Tribunal under the Rent Restriction Act (section 8 appeal right referenced in section 5)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mahida v Prajapati (Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 4610 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kakamega RRT Appeal from Case No. E034 of 2023 (Memorandum of Appeal dated 28th February 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4610/eng@2025-06-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.