Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedKilgoris CMELC Appeal (from Kilgoris CMELC Case No. E010 of 2023)· [2025] KEELC 7066 (KLR)

Konchory v Geem (Environment and Land Appeal E005 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 7066 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
16 October 2025
3,405 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~14 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed only the first validly allotted plot owner wins when two allotment letters clash, and county governments cannot allocate public land.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a first appeal to the Environment and Land Court at Kilgoris against the judgment of Hon. W.C Waswa SRM dated 31st January 2025 in Kilgoris CMELC Case No. E010 of 2023, in which the trial court had entered judgment for the plaintiff (the Respondent here) over plot No. 45 Block 3 Lolgorian Town. Both parties claimed the same parcel - which the court confirmed, following a site visit, was the same as plot No. 595 Lolgorian Town - through competing letters of allotment: the Appellant's dated 15th February 1996 from the defunct local authority, and the Respondent's dated 5th August 2022 from the Narok County Government. The court evaluated the trial evidence afresh and examined the statutory regimes governing allocation of public land. It held that under section 12 of the Land Act and the Land (Allocation of Public Land) Regulations 2017, allocation of public land is vested in the National Land Commission, and the County Government of Narok could not validly allocate the parcel absent a notice under section 14 and in a non-prescribed form; the Respondent's allotment was therefore a nullity. The Appellant had substantially complied with the repealed Government Lands Act regime, producing a PDP, minutes, allotment letter and receipt, and being first in time and in occupation, he was the bonafide allottee. Relying on Torino Enterprises, the court also held submissions on indefeasibility under section 24 of the Land Registration Act were misplaced since the parcel was unregistered. The appeal was allowed, the trial judgment set aside in its entirety, and the Appellant awarded costs of the appeal, suit and counter-claim.

Key legal issues

#
01

Validity of the Respondent's allotment letter issued by the County Government of Narok

Holding

The County Government of Narok had no power to allocate the public land; the Respondent's letter of allotment was a nullity.

Reasoning

Allocation of public land is vested in the National Land Commission under section 12 of the Land Act and Regulation 32 of the Land (Allocation of Public Land) Regulations 2017. No notice of intention to allocate under section 14 of the Land Act was produced, and the letter was not in the prescribed form LA5. The allocation therefore failed both substantive and procedural requirements.

p. 6
02

Who is the bonafide allottee of the suit parcel

Holding

The Appellant, first in time and regularly allocated in 1996, is the bonafide allottee; the plot was not available for reallocation.

Reasoning

The Appellant exhibited a PDP, allotment letter, allocation minutes and rent receipt showing substantial compliance with the repealed Government Lands Act regime. The plot became alienated upon first allocation and was not available for reallocation under Regulation 32(2); where there is double allocation, the first in time prevails.

p. 7
03

Relevance of section 24 of the Land Registration Act to unregistered allotments

Holding

Protection of a registered proprietor under section 24 was misplaced because neither party held a title over the suit parcel.

Reasoning

It was undisputed that the suit parcel was unregistered and neither party held a title. Since neither allotment letter had been perfected by registration, submissions invoking indefeasibility under sections 24 and 25 of the Land Registration Act were inapplicable, consistent with Torino Enterprises.

p. 4
04

Duties of a first appellate court

Holding

A first appellate court must reconsider and evaluate the evidence and draw its own conclusions.

Reasoning

The court restated the classic duty of a first appellate court, citing Selle v Associated Motor Boat, as the basis for its fresh evaluation of the trial evidence before reaching its own findings on the competing allotments.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A letter of allotment confers no transferable interests in land unless and until it is perfected and a title issued.
  • Under the repealed Government Lands Act, a Part Development Plan must be drawn and approved before unalienated Government land could be allocated, and a letter of allotment based on the approved PDP issued.
  • Where there is double allocation, the first in time prevails.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The judgment of the trial court is set aside in its entirety
  2. 2.The court finds that the Appellant is the bonafide allottee of plot No. 595 Lolgorian Town
  3. 3.The Appellant shall have costs of the Appeal, and costs of the suit and counter-claim in any event

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Land Registration Actsections 24, 25
  • Rating Actsection 20
  • Civil Procedure Actsection 27
  • Physical Land Use Planning Actsection 54
  • Land Actsections 12, 12(1)(e), 12(2), 14
  • Land (Allocation of Public Land) Regulations 2017Regulations 3, 32, 32(2), 32(4)
  • Government Lands Act (repealed)

Cases cited (7)

  • Faraj Maharus v J.B Martin Glass Industries and 3 Others
  • M'Mugwika Murogongo v Settlement Fund Trustees
  • Torino Enterprises Limited v Attorney General
    (Petition 5 (E006 of 2022) 2023 KESC 79 KCR
  • Selle and Another v Associated Motor Boart and 3 Others
  • Nelson Kazungu Chai and 9 Others v Pwani University College
    2014 (eKLR)
  • M'Mugwika (suing as administrator of the Estate of the Late Mupiwa M'Rugonga v Settlement Fund Trustee
  • Mkinara M. Rinkanya and Another v Gilbert M'bjiwe
    (1982-1988)
On appeal from
Chief Magistrate's Court, Kilgoris
CMELC Case No. E010 of 2023
Jurisdiction invoked
First appellate jurisdiction over a decision of a magistrates' court in an Environment and Land matter

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Konchory v Geem (Environment and Land Appeal E005 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 7066 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kilgoris CMELC Appeal (from Kilgoris CMELC Case No. E010 of 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7066/eng@2025-10-16

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