Takaungu Investments Company Limited v Khamis & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E019 of 2022) [2026] KEELC 4937 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court cancelled a land judgment won through a tiny newspaper notice, ruling property owners deserve a real chance to be heard.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Adequacy of substituted service
Substituted service via a barely legible classified advertisement was wanting; judicial notice taken that people rarely read the classifieds, especially in the digital age.
The court noted the advertisement was placed in the Classified/Transitions section with barely legible print. Taking judicial notice that readers rarely consult classifieds and that most now read digital papers lacking such sections, the court found the substituted service, though lawful, insufficient to secure the Applicant's right to be heard.
Setting aside ex-parte judgment under Order 12 Rule 7
The discretion was properly exercised in the Applicant's favour given inadequate service, a Defence raising triable issues, and non-inordinate delay.
The court applied Shah v Mbogo and the right to a fair hearing under Articles 48 and 50. The Applicant explained his delay, and the draft Defence raised trial issues, including a survey report showing the parcels 1.4km apart and a caution by the Plaintiff's director claiming a purchaser's interest, all of which warranted testing at a fresh hearing.
Setting aside of consent permitting substituted service
The consent was unnecessary since an application for leave to serve by substituted service is supposed to be ex-parte; the consent was set aside.
Counsel for the 2nd Respondent conceded that a consent on an ex-parte substituted service application was unnecessary. Given the consent underpinned the allegedly defective service, the court set it aside together with the resulting judgment and decree.
Legal principles established
#- The court has a wide, judiciously exercisable discretion to set aside an ex-parte judgment to avoid injustice or hardship, but not to assist a party who deliberately obstructed or delayed justice.
- Property rights cannot be arbitrarily taken away without an opportunity to be heard; substituted service in this case, though lawful, was wanting.
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of the orders and decree of 26th February 2025 directing cancellation/extinguishment of Title Number LAMU/MANDA ISLAND/232 and expungement of records, pending hearing of the main suit
- 2.Setting aside of the consent recorded between the Plaintiff and 2nd Defendant on 8th December 2022 issued as a court order on 13th December 2022
- 3.Setting aside of the judgment, orders and decree of 26th February 2025 and all consequential orders, actions and steps
- 4.Leave granted to the Applicant to file his Defence as per the draft, with the suit to be heard afresh
- 5.Applicant to bear the costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 12 Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Takaungu Investments Company Limited v Khamis & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E019 of 2022) [2026] KEELC 4937 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC E019 OF 2022. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4937/eng@2026-07-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.