SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Ochieng v Okumu (Civil Appeal 181 of 1995) [1995] KECA 169 (KLR) (24 November 1995) (Judgment)

[1995] KECA 169 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
169
Citation
[1995] KECA 169 (KLR)
Decided
24 November 1995
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Kenya at Kisii (Mr Justice Mbaluto) dated 26th April, 1995 in HCCC No 464 OF 1991CoramAA LAKHA, PK TUNOI, AM AKIWUMI
Holding

The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Facts

The appellant, Charles Ogejo Ochieng, claimed trespass against the respondent, Geoffrey Okumu, over land parcel number Suna East/Wasweta 1/1682, which he registered as his own. The respondent, however, claimed ownership of land parcel LR No 8534/130, which he had acquired from the Government of Kenya.

Issues

  1. Whether the learned judge erred in not determining the issue before him which was whether or not the respondent has trespassed on the land registered in the name of the appellant.
  2. Whether the appellant has the right to sue in trespass since the respondent was lawfully in possession of the title to the suit land at the time of the alleged trespass.

Reasoning

The learned judge found that there was an apparent confusion in the actual position of the two parcels of land, which confusion sprang from the sub-division in or about 1975 of the head title of the original plot number 193. The respondent's title was found to be indefeasible, and no evidence was led by the appellant to show a nexus between the respondent's title and any damages.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case