Kenya Power & Lighting Company Ltd v Murungi (Environment and Land Appeal E005 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 2919 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court confirmed you can recover money paid under a judgment later overturned, and can block land sales to secure that refund.
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 Appellant is entitled to recover the decretal sum that was paid out to the Respondent
- 2.Whether the Appellant has established a basis for the issuance of the orders of inhibition or otherwise
Key legal issues
#Entitlement to recover decretal sum paid under a decree later set aside on appeal
The Appellant is entitled to recover the entire monies paid to the Respondent, together with interest and costs, on the basis of the impugned decree which was set aside on appeal.
It was common ground that judgment had been entered in the lower court for Kshs. 421,867/= plus costs and interest; the total paid was Kshs. 592,884/=. On appeal, the judgment was set aside and the suit struck out for want of jurisdiction, quashing the decree. The court held that restitution follows as a matter of course upon setting aside a decree, citing Dhiman v Shah and Section 91 of the Civil Procedure Act, and that it would be unconscionable for the Respondent to retain monies paid under a decree now non-existent.
Whether a basis existed for orders of inhibition against the suit property
The Appellant established a basis for the issuance of the orders of inhibition, having a legal right to pursue recovery and restitution of the decretal sum, with the suit property being the only known asset of the Respondent.
The court reasoned that execution or attachment of immovable property must be preceded by an order of inhibition to avert alienation or transfer during execution proceedings. The Appellant had been unable to ascertain any other assets of the Respondent besides the suit property, and the Respondent might transfer or dispose of it to defeat execution. The inhibition preserves the status of the suit property pending execution.
Legal principles established
#- Where a decree underpinning payment of a decretal sum is set aside, the judgment debtor is enjoined to restore, refund and restitute the benefits received, and such refund follows as a matter of course without necessarily requiring an express order by the appellate court.
- Any execution or attachment of immovable property must be preceded by an order of inhibition to avert alienation or transfer of the property during execution proceedings.
Court orders
#- 1.An order of inhibition issued to be registered against the title in respect of LR No. Abogeta/L-Kiugone/1063 (the suit property)
- 2.The Land Registrar, Imenti South sub county/Nkubu, directed to register the order of inhibition against the suit property so as to preserve the title and avert any transactions in respect thereof
- 3.Costs of the Application awarded to the Appellant
- 4.Costs assessed in the sum of Kshs. 25,000/= only
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Nkubu Principal Magistrate's Court
- Nkubu PMCC No. 55 of 2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 26 and 68 of the Land Registration Act, 2012; Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010; Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Chapter 21, Laws of Kenya)
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.
i. There be and is hereby issue an order of inhibition to be registered against the title in respect of LR No. Abogeta/L-Kiugone/1063 [the suit property].
ii. The Land Registrar, Imenti South sub county/Nkubu , be and is hereby directed to register the order of inhibition against the suit property so as to preserve the title and to avert any transactions being taken in respect thereof.
iv. The costs in terms of clause [iii] be and are hereby assessed in the sum of Kshs. 25,000/= only.
In the case of Dhiman v Shah [2025] KECA 1264 (KLR), the Court of Appeal discussed the legal efiect and consequences attendant to the setting aside of a Judgment.
It is instructive to state that equity frowns upon unconscionable conduct.
Issues in the judgment
#The suit parcel is inconsistently described in the judgment as Abogeta-Kiungone/1063, Abogeta-L-Kiungone/1063 and, in the final orders, Abogeta/L-Kiugone/1063.
Parties are referred to as 'appellant'/'respondent' although the matter before the court is a first-instance notice of motion (post-appeal execution ancillary application), not an appeal itself.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Power & Lighting Company Ltd v Murungi (Environment and Land Appeal E005 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 2919 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2919/eng@2026-05-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.