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

Koira Limited v El Busaidy & 2 others (Administrators of the Estate of Sir Ali Bin Salim El Busaidi) & another (Civil Appeal 98 of 2019) [2023] KECA 434 (KLR) (14 April 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KECA 434 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
434
Citation
[2023] KECA 434 (KLR)
Decided
14 April 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureFirst appeal from the judgment of the Environment and Land CourtCoramA. Omollo, JUDGE OF APPEAL, JW LESSIT, Shah
Holding

The judgment of the ELC Court is set aside, and the 1st Respondent is compelled to renew the Appellant’s leasehold interest for a further period of 99 years on the same terms contained in the Indenture dated 20th January 1914, save for the term as regards the amount payable as rent.

Facts

The suit properties were originally owned by Sir Ali Bin Salim El Busaidi, who died in 1940. The estate was administered by different individuals until 2010 when Salim Soud Ali bin Salim was appointed as administrator. Koira Limited claimed renewal of its leasehold interest in the properties under the original indenture of 1914.

Issues

  1. Whether the 1st respondent was bound under the terms of the Indenture dated 20th January 1914 to grant renewal of the Indenture for a further period of 99 years, and if so on what terms.
  2. Whether the appellant was entitled to the prayers it sought in the re-amended plaint.

Reasoning

The Court re-evaluated the evidence and concluded that the 1st respondent was bound to renew the lease under the terms of the Indenture, and the appellant was entitled to the renewal.

Outcome

Appeal is found to be merited.

Orders

  • Judgment be and is hereby entered in favour of the Appellant on the terms that the 1st Respondent be and is hereby compelled to renew the Appellant’s leasehold interest in the properties known as Title numbers Mombasa/Block XXI/151, 152 and 498 for a further period of 99 years, on the same terms contained in the Indenture dated 20th January 1914, save for the term as regards the amount payable as rent which has since been overtaken by events.
  • The 1st Respondent will meet the Appellant’s costs of this appeal and of the suit before the ELC.

Remedies

  • Renewal of the Appellant’s leasehold interest for a further period of 99 years on the same terms contained in the Indenture dated 20th January 1914, save for the term as regards the amount payable as rent which has since been overtaken by events.
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 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case