Samuel Churu Njiiri (as administrator of the estate of Herman Njiiri Kamoko alias Njiiri Kamoko (deceased)) v Munga Muchiri

(d) That upon orders (b) and (c) above, this Court be pleased to grant an order for the subdivision, distribution, registration and issuance of title deeds by Murang’a Land Registrar among the beneficiaries of the estate of Herman Njiiri Kamoko alias Njiri Kamoko as follows:1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Samuel Churu Njiiri Joyce Wambui Waithiga Peterson Kamoko Njiiri Lucy Wambui Muiruri Peter Njoroge Wanjama - 2.25 acres 2.25 acres 2.25 acres 2.25 acres 3.00 acres (e) That this Court be pleased to direct the District Land Registrar Murang’a registry to dispense with the production of the original title deed to the suit parcel Loc.9/Ichichi/307. (f) That the Defendants be condemned to pay the costs of this suit. 2) The summons is based on eleven(11) grounds and is supported by the affidavit of Samuel Churu Njiiri dated 20-2-2026. The gist of the grounds and the affidavit is as follows. One, the Plaintiff is the administrator of the estate of his later father, Herman Njiiri Kamoko alias Njiiri Kamoko. Two, in the year 1971, the Plaintiff’s father bought the suit land from Gichia Kamoko, the father of the Defendants. The purchase price per one acre was Kshs.800/= . In total the Plaintiff’s father paid the Defendant’s father a total of Kshs.9,2000/= as the suit land is 11.5 acres. Three, upon purchase, Njiiri Kamoko occupied the suit land and built a home for himself and his family. Gichia Kamoko, the Defendant’s father migrated to North Kinangop in Nyandarua County and left the suit land to Njiiri Kamoko and his family. Four, on 14-10-1999, Njiiri Kamoko died. Before he died he had cautioned the suit land on 3-61985. Gichia Kamoko also died in Nyandarua County before he could transfer the suit land to Njiiri Kamoko. Five, the only way that the family of late Njiiri Kamoko can become registered as the owners of the suit land is by this suit because they have acquired the suit land by way of adverse possession. 3) In support of his case, the Plaintiff filed the following evidence. (i) Supporting affidavits dated 20-2-2026. MRG ELCLOS E041 OF 2025 2J of 4

page 2 of 4

(ii) Copy of limited grant in Succession Cause No. 120/2017 at Kangema Magistrate Court. (iii) Copy of sale agreement dated 26-10-1971 and acknowledgement dated 15-111971. (iv) Copy of certificate of official search for the suit land dated 23-6-2025. (v) Copy of letter from the office of the Chief of Engineer location, North Kinangop dated 18-2-2026. (vi) Six photographs showing houses and crops growing on a piece of land. 4) According to the affidavit of James Mwangi Waburi, process server, he served Peter Gichia Munga with the originating summons and its annexures on 24-2-2026 at a shop called Ngonda General Shop which is located less than one Kilometre from a place called Muti-ini wa Kenyatta where the first president of Kenya planted a tree in 1965. He took about one hour to explain the contents of the originating summons to the first Defendant. The first Defendant assured the process server that he would discuss the matter with his brother . He also indicated that he would not defend the suit. 5) The Defendants did not defend the suit. It therefore proceeded as undefended. 6) At the trial on 29-7-2026, the Plaintiff and his witness Simon Churu Muchiri testified on oath. The Plaintiff also adopted the documentary evidence. 7) I have carefully considered the evidence adduced by the Plaintiff in this case. The issue for determination are the following. (a) Whether the Plaintiff has proved the ingredients of adverse possession. (b) Whether the Defendant’s title to the suit property has been extinguished by the operation of law. (c) Whether the Plaintiff and his siblings are entitled to be registered as proprietors of the suit land. (d) Who should bear the costs of the suit. MRG ELCLOS E041 OF 2025 3J of 4

page 3 of 4

8) The law on 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 to recover land after the expiry of 12 years from the date when the right of action accrued. In this case, the agreement between the Plaintiffs’ fathers did not provide for the transfer process of the land. It was totally blind to this aspect. It is my finding that from the year 1971 to the year 2025 when this suit was filed, the right of the Defendants to recover the suit land has expired because more than twelve(12) years have lapsed. 9) Section 13 provides that a right to recover land does not accrue unless the land is in possession of a person in whose favour the limitation period can run. In this case it is the Plaintiff’s family that has been in possession and time started running when the Defendants’ father failed to take steps to transfer the land to the Plaintiff’s father, that is to say, six months from 26-10-1971. 10) Section 17 provides for the extinguishing of the title of the person whose right to recover land has expired. In this case, the late Gichia Kamoko, the registered owner and his heirs have lost the right to recover the suit land. Their right has expired due to effluxion of time. 11) In conclusion and for the reasons already given, I enter judgment for the Plaintiff against the Defendants in terms of prayers (a), (b), ( c), (d) and (e) of paragraph [1] of this Judgment. No order 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 Plaintiff’s Counsel – Mr Matwere Defendant’s Counsel - Absent MRG ELCLOS E041 OF 2025 4J of 4

page 4 of 4