Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2025] KEELC 8262 (KLR)

Murimi v Murimi & another (Environment and Land Case 106 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 8262 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
23 October 2025
MKMugo Kamau
1,081 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court refused to adopt a land resurvey report because one family member was excluded from the survey, ordering a fresh survey by independent surveyors.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This Environment and Land Court decision at Nyandarua, delivered by Hon Mugo Kamau J on 23 October 2025, deals with a Report by Land Registrar Mr S.W. Githinji dated 15 May 2025, prepared pursuant to a court order of 19 March 2025 directing the Land Registrar and County Surveyor to resurvey parcels Nyandarua/Mirangine/829, 830, 831 and 832, subdivisions of parcel No. 33. The Registrar's Report found the ground acreage (26 acres) fell short of the family's expectation of 36 acres, recorded an agreed internal sharing, and recommended that a new access road opened by Benjamin Njoroge be registered because the old registered road was closed and built upon, the new road having served the four families for over 14 years and acquired an adverse possession status; it also proposed boundary adjustments so Veronica retains six acres, Benjamin's family ten and a half acres, and Pauline seven and a half acres. National Government Surveyor Mr Franklin M. Muyonga's Report recorded discrepancies between registered and actual acreages and warned that implementing the RIM access road would require demolishing at least two permanent houses. Inviting comments, the court found the Plaintiff largely accepted the survey but sought a straight-line boundary and registered acreages, while the 1st Defendant objected that she was absent from the survey, that parcel 831 had already been subdivided into eight pieces with its title closed, and that parcels 829 and 830 lacked access. Finding a further exercise to narrow the issues inescapable, the court ordered each party to appoint an independent private surveyor who, with a County Surveyor other than Mr Muyonga, would visit the land and file a joint or separate report within 45 days. No costs order was made.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Land Registrar's and Surveyor's Reports could be adopted for boundary adjustment

Holding

The Reports were not adopted outright; the court directed a further joint or separate survey by independent private surveyors chosen by each party with a County Surveyor other than Mr Muyonga

Reasoning

The Land Registrar found the ground acreage (26 acres) fell short of the expected 36 acres, that a new access road opened by Benjamin Njoroge had been used for over 14 years and closed the registered road, and proposed boundary adjustments. The Surveyor confirmed acreage discrepancies and that implementing the RIM road would require demolition of at least 2 permanent houses. The 1st Defendant objected that she was not present at the survey and that parcel 831 had already been subdivided into 8 pieces and its title closed, which the Report did not reflect. The Plaintiff largely accepted the survey but sought a straight-line boundary and registered acreages. Given these objections, the court found a further surveying exercise inescapable to narrow the issues.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A court-directed resurvey report that is objected to by a party who was excluded from the survey process, and that does not reflect the current state of subdivision, warrants a fresh survey with independent surveyors

Court orders

#
  1. 1.That each party shall choose an independent private surveyor who, together with a County Surveyor other than Mr Muyonga, shall visit the suit land
  2. 2.That the independent surveyors shall, within 45 days of the order, file a joint report, and failing that, separate reports
  3. 3.That the matter proceeds as an exercise to narrow down the issues, which the court found inescapable
Jurisdiction invoked
Not expressly stated; the Court acts on its own prior Order of 19/3/2025 directing a resurvey and report by the Land Registrar and County Surveyor

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Murimi v Murimi & another (Environment and Land Case 106 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 8262 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/8262/eng@2025-10-23

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