Ndungu t/a Urutagwo Mwiruti Women Group v Kanyia (Environment and Land Case 1255 of 2013) [2026] KEELC 4134 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land buyer proved her case and won a court order forcing the seller to transfer three Utawala plots to her within 90 days.
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 Plaintiff in the Counterclaim is entitled to an order of specific performance
Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiff in the Counterclaim proved entitlement to specific performance
Yes. She proved a duly executed contract, full payment of the purchase price including transaction costs, and possession; the Defendant in the Counterclaim adduced no evidence to rebut this.
The court noted that the main suit's plaintiff admitted a sale agreement was executed and that the purchase price was paid, disputing only payment of transaction costs. The Counterclaimant produced share certificates and testified she was in possession and had partially developed the plots. The Defendant in the Counterclaim called no witness and adduced no evidence that transaction costs remained unpaid. On a balance of probability, the court found the Counterclaimant performed her obligations and the Defendant failed to comply, warranting specific performance.
Legal principles established
#- Uncontroverted evidence must still be interrogated; a plaintiff must prove its case on a balance of probability whether the evidence is unchallenged or not.
- Specific performance is an equitable remedy based on the existence of a valid enforceable contract and will not be ordered where damages are an adequate alternative remedy.
- An aggrieved party claiming breach of contract must prove offer, acceptance and consideration.
Court orders
#- 1.An Order of Specific performance be and is hereby issued compelling the Defendant in the Counterclaim to effect transfer of Plot Nos. 66, 68 and 70 hived off LR No. 6845/183 to the Plaintiff in the Counterclaim within ninety (90) days from the date hereof.
- 2.That costs of this suit be and is hereby awarded to the Plaintiff in the Counterclaim.
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over the Counterclaim concerning land parcel LR No. 6845/183, Utawala
Relief refused
#The Plaintiff's (main suit) claim for declaration that the Defendant's contract was a nullity, permanent injunction and general damages
The case for the Plaintiff in the main suit was dismissed for want of prosecution on 13th December 2024; only the Counterclaim proceeded to judgment.
Costs
Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiff in the Counterclaim.
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.
An Order of Specific performance be and is hereby issued compelling the Defendant in the Counterclaim to efiect transfer of Plot Nos. 66, 68 and 70 hived ofi LR No. 6845/183 to the Plaintifi in the Counterclaim within ninety (90) days from the date hereof.
I find that the Plaintifi in the Counterclaim has indeed made a case for specific performance as there is a duly executed contract.
a plaintifi must prove its case too upon a balance of probability whether the evidence is unchallenged or not.
Issues in the judgment
#Defendant's written submissions are dated after the judgment date
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ndungu t/a Urutagwo Mwiruti Women Group v Kanyia (Environment and Land Case 1255 of 2013) [2026] KEELC 4134 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4134/eng@2026-07-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.