Murage v Kibira & 3 others (Environment and Land Case 149 of 2015) [2025] KEELC 6674 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court ordered the Director of Survey and Nairobi County to jointly confirm whether two disputed Umoja plots are the same property within 90 days.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the 2nd and 3rd Defendants should be compelled to produce a joint report to clarify whether Plot No. 2/B67.4 Umoja Inner Core and Land Parcel Number Nairobi Block 83/874 (Plot No. CS-70B Umoja Innercore Sector III) refer to the same property
Key legal issues
#Whether the court should compel the 2nd and 3rd Defendants to prepare and present a joint report on the identity of the disputed property
Yes. The application was unopposed, an earlier report by the 2nd Defendant was inconclusive due to the 3rd Defendant's non-cooperation, and only a joint survey report will enable the court to resolve the dispute.
The court noted the plaintiff had earlier obtained similar orders against the Director of Survey, but the resulting report of 5th April 2024 was inconclusive because the Nairobi City County had not provided its maps. The Director of Survey and the County were both enjoined to the suit by orders of 9th April 2024. As custodians of the relevant instruments and maps, they are best placed to prepare the report, and a joint report is necessary for the court to effectually and completely determine the competing ownership claims.
Legal principles established
#- Where an earlier survey report is inconclusive because a custodian of land records has not availed its maps, the court may direct the relevant public custodians to jointly verify and report on the identity of the suit property to enable effective determination.
Court orders
#- 1.The 2nd and 3rd Defendants to verify and present a joint report to Court confirming whether the disputed property is Plot No. 2/B67.4 Umoja Inner Core or Land Parcel Number Nairobi Block 83/874 (Plot No. CS-70B Umoja Innercore Sector III), within ninety (90) days from the date of the order
- 2.Costs of the application to be in the cause (as sought and unopposed)
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over a land dispute
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
From this excerpt, I opine that it is pertinent for the Nairobi County Government to avail their maps in respect to Plot No. 2/B67.4 Umoja Inner Core, to enable the Court efiectually and completely determine the issue in dispute herein.
I direct that the 2nd and 3rd Defendants do verify and present a joint report to Court confirming whether the disputed property is Plot No. 2/B67.4 Umoja Inner Core or land parcel Number Nairobi Block 83/874 (Plot No. CS-70B Umoja Innercore Sector III), within ninety (90) days from the date hereof.
Issues in the judgment
#Case number and neutral citation are not stated anywhere in the judgment text provided.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Murage v Kibira & 3 others (Environment and Land Case 149 of 2015) [2025] KEELC 6674 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6674/eng@2025-10-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.