Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNotice of Motion dated 11th March, 2025 (in a suit over Title No. Kericho/Sosiot/3965)· [2026] KEELC 557 (KLR)

Naniwet & another v Tum & another (Environment and Land Case E016 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 557 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
5 February 2026
3,299 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~13 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenyan courts cannot decide land boundary disputes until the Land Registrar first ascertains and fixes the boundaries under the Land Registration Act.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Kericho (L. A. Omollo, J) determined a Notice of Motion dated 11th March 2025 by the Plaintiffs/Applicants, Rhoda Chepkorir Naniwet and Catherine Chepwogen Kirui, in a suit against the Defendants/Respondents over Title No. Kericho/Sosiot/3965. The Applicants sought orders directing the County Land Surveyor, Kericho to re-ascertain and fix the parcel's boundaries, and directing the OCS Sosiot to provide security during the exercise. They claimed to be registered owners of the parcel, a subdivision of Kericho/Sosiot/46 surveyed pursuant to orders in Kericho HC Succession Cause No. 182 of 2003 (Estate of Kiptum Arap Naniwet, deceased), and alleged the beacons had been tampered with. The Defendants opposed, contending the orders were substantive reliefs premature at the interlocutory stage, that the boundaries had never been legally fixed, and that the Applicants should first have approached the Land Registrar. The court held that Section 18(2) of the Land Registration Act bars the Court from entertaining boundary disputes unless boundaries have first been determined by the Land Registrar, applying Kario v Sekento and Nangurai v County Government of Kajiado. Although the Applicants asserted there was no boundary dispute, their own Plaint averred removal of beacons and boundary obliteration. No evidence showed the survey ordered in the succession cause was done, and no application had been made to the Land Registrar. The application was dismissed with costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Court has jurisdiction to order re-ascertainment and fixing of boundaries of registered land under Section 18(2) of the Land Registration Act

Holding

The Court lacks jurisdiction where boundaries have not been determined by the Land Registrar; the statutory bar in Section 18(2) is operative until the Land Registrar discharges his duty.

Reasoning

The court noted Section 18(2) bars the Court from entertaining boundary disputes unless boundaries have been determined in accordance with that section. Although the Plaintiffs claimed the boundaries had been fixed following a High Court succession order, no evidence of the survey was adduced, and the Plaint's own averments disclosed a boundary dispute arising from removal of beacons. The Plaintiffs had never applied to the Land Registrar, so the application was premature and the Court could not entertain it.

p. 8

Legal principles established

#
  • Under Section 18(2) of the Land Registration Act, a party must first apply to the Land Registrar for the ascertainment and fixing of boundaries before approaching the Court.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Plaintiffs/Applicants application dated 11th March, 2025 is dismissed with costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 51 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Section 13(5) of the Environment and Land Court Act; Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Naniwet & another v Tum & another (Environment and Land Case E016 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 557 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of Motion dated 11th March, 2025 (in a suit over Title No. Kericho/Sosiot/3965). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/557/eng@2026-02-05

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