Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedEnvironment and Land Appeal E018 of 2023· [2025] KEELC 6823 (KLR)

Kabunduiru v Kabwi (Environment and Land Appeal E018 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 6823 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court (High Court)
9 October 2025
5,283 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~21 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court in Meru ruled that customary trust claims must be backed by solid evidence, awarded the disputed land to the appellant, and ordered the respondent to vacate within 180 days.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a first appeal to the Environment and Land Court at Meru against the judgment of Hon. R. Ongira (SRM) delivered on 29th August 2023, in which the trial magistrate held that the respondent (plaintiff) had proved a customary trust entitling him to one acre out of L.R No. Nyambene/Uringi III/978 (now subdivided), and dismissed the appellant's (defendant's) counterclaim. The parties are brothers, sons of the late M'Ibiri M'Kirunya. The appellant, canvassing the appeal by written submissions, argued that the respondent failed to prove customary trust and fraud. The respondent maintained he had occupied and developed a one-acre portion for over 30 years and relied on the Supreme Court decision in Isaac Kiebia M'Inanga v Isaya Theuri M'Lintari. The court, per Oguttu Mboya J, reiterated the first appellate court's mandate to re-evaluate evidence under Section 78 of the Civil Procedure Act. Applying the five elements of customary trust from the Kiebia decision, the court found the respondent had not proved, in particular, that he could have been registered but for an intervening circumstance, since their father had distributed land to all three sons during his lifetime. The court also held that fraud allegations must be proved by evidence, and distinguished Munyu Maina, holding that a challenger to title must first discharge the evidential burden before the title holder proves his root of title. Allowing the appeal, the court set aside the trial judgment, dismissed the respondent's suit, allowed the counterclaim with a declaration of ownership and an order for the respondent to vacate within 180 days, failing which eviction would issue, and awarded costs of the appeal and the subordinate court suit to the appellant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the respondent proved customary trust over the suit property

Holding

The respondent failed to establish customary trust; both brothers were each given land by their father and no intervening circumstance was proved

Reasoning

The court applied the Supreme Court's five elements in Isaac Kiebia M'Inanga. Evidence showed the father distributed land among his three sons during his lifetime, the respondent receiving his own parcel. Element four (entitlement to registration but for an intervening circumstance) was essential and unproved. The respondent's offer at the 2011 family meeting to exchange land undermined his trust claim. The trial magistrate's contrary findings were perverse.

p. 8
02

Whether the appellant established the root of his title to the suit property

Holding

Yes; the appellant produced certificates of official search and the respondent failed to discharge the evidential burden to impugn the title or prove fraud

Reasoning

Under Sections 26(1)(a) & (b) of the Land Registration Act, a title holder is protected unless the title was procured in contravention of due process. A party alleging fraud bears the burden of proving it with credible evidence; the respondent's allegations were unsupported. The Munyu Maina ratio was clarified: the challenger must first adduce evidence before the title holder is called to prove the root of title.

p. 9
03

Scope of jurisdiction of a first appellate court

Holding

A first appellate court may review, re-evaluate and re-analyse the evidence and reach independent conclusions, but with caution and deference to trial court findings unless perverse

Reasoning

Relying on Section 78 of the Civil Procedure Act and authorities including Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co, Abok James Odera, Peters v Sunday Post and Gitobu Imanyara, the court held that it is vested with jurisdiction to re-evaluate findings of the court of first instance while making due allowance for the trial court's advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Trust, whether customary or otherwise, must be proved by evidence; a court cannot infer or presume trust absent evidence.
  • A claimant alleging customary trust must prove, among other elements, that he could have been entitled to be registered as owner but for some intervening circumstance.
  • A party challenging a certificate of title must first discharge the evidential burden before the title holder can be called upon to prove the root of his title.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Appeal is allowed
  2. 2.The Judgment of the Senior Resident Magistrate dated 29th August 2023 and the consequential decree are set aside
  3. 3.The respondent's suit vide amended Plaint dated 19th May 2016 is dismissed
  4. 4.The Appellant's counterclaim dated 7th September 2016 is allowed: declaration that L.R No. Nyambene/Uringi III/978 [now subdivided] lawfully belongs to the appellant
  5. 5.The respondent to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the suit property or the portion occupied by him within 180 days from the date of the judgment
  6. 6.In default, the appellant may levy eviction and an eviction order shall issue
  7. 7.Eviction costs/expenses to be certified by the Deputy Registrar and recovered from the respondent
  8. 8.Costs of the Appeal awarded to the Appellant
  9. 9.The Appellant shall also have the costs of the suit and the counterclaim in the subordinate court

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Act, Chapter 21, Laws of KenyaSection 78
  • Land Registration ActSections 26(1)(a) & (b)
  • Evidence Act, Chapter 80, Laws of KenyaSections 108 and 109
  • Trustee ActNot specified

Cases cited (20)

  • Isaac Kiebia M'Inanga vs Isaya Theuir M'Lintari & another
    (2018) eKLR
  • Dominic Otieno Ogonyo & 2 others vs Helinda Akoth Walori
    (2022) eKLR
  • Selle & Another vs. Associated Motor Boat Co. Ltd & Others
    [1968] EA 123
  • Abok James Odera T/A A.J Odera & Associates versus John Patrick Machira T/A Machira & Co. Advocates
    [2013] eKLR
  • Mwana Sokoni versus Kenya Business Limited
    (1985) KLR 931
  • Sottos Shipping versus Sauviet Sohold
    The Times, March 16, 1983
  • Peters versus Sunday Post Limited
    (1958) EA 424
  • Gitobu Imanyara & 2 others v Attorney General
    [2016] eKLR
  • Kazungu Fondo Shutu vs Japhet Noti Charo
    (2021) eKLR
  • Mumo v Makau
    [2002] 1EA.170
  • Kanyi Muthiora v Maritha Nyokabi Muthiora
    Nairobi Court of Appeal No.19 of 1982
  • Juletabi African Adventure Limited & another v Christopher Michael Lockley
    [2017] eKLR
  • Twalib Hatayan Twalib Hatayan & Anor v Said Saggar Ahmed Al-Heidy & Others
    [2015] eKLR
  • Kiarie v. Kinuthia
  • Embakasi Properties Ltd vs the Commissioner of Lands & another
    (2019) eKLR
  • Munyu Maina vs Hiram Gathiha Maina
    (2013) eKLR
  • Frank Logistics Limited v Golden Lion Real Estate Company & 6 others
    (Civil Appeal E303 of 2024) [2025] KECA 1471 (KLR) (12 September 2025)
  • Moya Drift Farm Ltd vs Theuri
    (1973) E.A
  • Mohanson (K) Ltd vs The Land Registrar Kajiado
    (2017) eKLR
  • Waas Enterprises Ltd vs Nairobi City Council
    (2014) eKLR
On appeal from
Subordinate Court (Senior Resident Magistrate's Court)
Not stated in the judgment
Jurisdiction invoked
First appeal under Section 78 of the Civil Procedure Act, Chapter 21, Laws of Kenya

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kabunduiru v Kabwi (Environment and Land Appeal E018 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 6823 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Environment and Land Appeal E018 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6823/eng@2025-10-09

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.