Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Agnes Wangari Ndung'u v Nancy Wanjiru Githanda

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MURANG’A ELCLOS E042 OF 2025 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR ADVERSE POSSESSION AND IN THE MATTER OF LAND PARCEL NUMBER LOC 7/GAKOIGO/3020 AND IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 28(L) OF THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT, 2012 AND SECTION 13,37 AND 38 OF THE LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT CAP 22 LAWS OF KENYA AGNES WANGARI NDUNG’U……….…………………………………………………..APPLICANT VERSUS NANCY WANJIRU GITHANDA……………………………………………………….RESPONDENT JUDGMENT 1) In the originating summons dated 3-12-2025, the Applicant seeks the following orders against the Respondent. 1. That the Applicant is entitled to be registered as the absolute owner of Land Parcel No. Loc.7/Gakoigo/3020 measuring 0.2 acres under Section 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act, Cap 22, on the ground that she has been in free, notorious and exclusive possession of the entire land for a period of more than 12 years preceding the filing of the summons herein. 2. The Respondents’ rights as the registered owner of the suit land have been extinguished by the Applicant’s adverse possession, user, occupation and cultivation for more than 12 years. 3. The Applicant seeks to be registered as the owner of Land parcel No. Loc.7/Gakoigo/3020. 4. The Land Registrar Murang’a be empowered and authorized to register the Applicant as the absolute owner of land parcel No. Loc.7/Gakoigo/3020. MRG ELCLOS E042 OF 2025 1J of 3

page 1 of 3

5. The Deputy Registrar of the Court be empowered and authorized to sign all the Respondent to effect the transfer of land Parcel No. Loc.7/Gakoigo/3020 to the name of the Applicant. 6. The costs herein be proved for. 2) The case for the Applicant is as follows. Firstly on 27-4-2012, the Applicant and the Respondent entered into a sale agreement whereby the Respondent sold land parcel No. Loc.7/Gakoigo/3020 measuring 0.2 acres at the then agreed purchase price of Kshs. 120,000/=.The first installment of Kshs. 100,000/= was paid on the date of the agreement. The balance of Kshs. 20,000/= was to be paid upon the transfer of the suit land to the Plaintiff. This balance was paid on 25-8-2015 and it was acknowledged by the Respondent. Secondly, upon execution of the sale agreement on 27-4-2012, the Respondent gave the Applicant vacant possession. The Applicant has since developed the suit land by building a three(3) roomed permanent house, a two roomed semi permanent house, a kitchen, a pig sty and has installed water and electricity. Since then, the Respondent has not set foot on the suit land. The Applicant has exercised and held full possessory rights over the suit land. Thirdly, the suit land was charged to Barclays Bank and the Respondent full paid the loan as per the agreement of 27-4-2012 but she has not discharged the charge. Fourthly, the Respondent is not responsive to the Applicant’s request to attend the Land Control Board and is totally uncooperative thereby making the filing of this suit necessary. For the above and other reasons, the Applicant prays for the orders mentioned above. 3) In support of her case, the Applicant filed the following evidence (i) Supporting affidavit dated 3-12-2025. (ii) Copy of certificate of official search for the suit land dated 15-8-2015. (iii) Copy of agreement for sale of the suit land dated 27-4-2012. (iv) Copy of acknowledgement dated 25-8-2015. (v) Three(3) photographs showing a homestead with two houses, trees and geese. 4) The Respondent was served with the originating summons on 5-2-2026 at Makongeni Estate, Thika near Makongeni Police Station. She gave her mobile phone number as 0726812078. This is according to the process server named Simon G. Kamau in his affidavit of service MRG ELCLOS E042 OF 2025 2J of 3

page 2 of 3

dated 6-2-2026. Despite service, the Respondent did not file any response to the summons. The summons proceeded as undefended. 5) The law relating to adverse possession is to be found in Sections 7,13,17 and 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act. Section 7 provides that an action may not be brought by a registered owner of land to recover land after the expiry of twelve(12) years from the date when the right of action accrued. In this case, the Respondent cannot recover the suit land because it is more than twelve years since she last occupied it. Secondly, Section 13 provides that a right of action to recover land does not accrue unless the land is in possession of a person in whose favour the limitation period can run. In the case of the Applicant, the period that has adverse started running in the year 2012 and continued running until the suit was filed on 3-12-2025. 6) Thirdly, Section 17 provides for the extinguishment of the title of the person whose right to recover the land has expired. In this case, the right of the Respondent to recover the land adversely occupied by the Applicant has been extinguished by operation of the law due to effluxion of time. 7) In conclusion and for the reasons given, I enter judgment for the Applicant against the Respondent in terms of prayers 1,2,3,4 and 5. No orders as to costs. Dated, Signed and Delivered virtually at Murang’a this 23rd day of September, 2026. M.N. GICHERU JUDGE. Delivered online in the presence of; Court Assistant – Antony Applicant’s Counsel – Miss Kimani holding brief Respondent – Absent MRG ELCLOS E042 OF 2025 3J of 3

page 3 of 3

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.