Okajaa & 2 others v Pamba (Environment and Land Case 25 of 2019) [2026] KEELC 5128 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court dismissed an adverse possession claim because the family couldn't prove they ever fully paid for the land they'd occupied for decades.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the applicants proved adverse possession of the claimed portion of South Teso/Amukura/18
No - the applicants, having premised their claim on a sale agreement between their deceased uncle and the respondent's father, failed to prove the terms of the agreement or that the purchase price was paid in full, which was a precondition to time running for adverse possession.
The applicants' entry onto the land was allegedly pursuant to a sale agreement between John Pius Cornel Okelele and Gabriel Pamba. Under the authorities cited (Wambugu v Njuguna; Samuel Miki Waweru v Jane Njeri Richu; Munyanya v Keya), possession under an agreement of sale is with permission and becomes adverse only upon full payment of the purchase price or default by the seller to complete. No agreement document, witness to it, or proof of payment was tendered, so the plea failed on a balance of probabilities.
Whether the suit is res judicata Kakamega HCC 36 of 1994 (OS) and other prior suits
No - the respondent failed to demonstrate that the former suits were heard and determined on their merits by a court with jurisdiction.
The respondent contended the suit was res judicata prior litigation including Kakamega HCC 36 of 1994 which was dismissed. On review of the pleadings and proceedings from the former suits, the court found nothing showing the former suits were heard and determined on the merits by a competent court, so the res judicata plea was unsubstantiated.
Legal principles established
#- Where a claimant's entry is pursuant to a sale agreement, adverse possession does not begin to run until the purchase price is paid in full; the claimant must prove the terms of the agreement and full payment
Court orders
#- 1.The plaintiffs'/applicants' suit is dismissed with costs to the respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land parcel South Teso/Amukura/18
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Okajaa & 2 others v Pamba (Environment and Land Case 25 of 2019) [2026] KEELC 5128 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Busia ELC 25 of 2019 (Originating Summons dated 27th March 2019, amended 6th December 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5128/eng@2026-07-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.