MW v Kimani & 2 others (Civil Appeal 286 of 2019) [2025] KECA 506 (KLR) (21 March 2025) (Judgment)

Facts

The appellant claimed ownership of a property known as plot No. xxx, which she alleged she acquired on 14th December 1984. She claimed the respondents unlawfully entered the property and took possession of two shops, while the other three were let out. The respondents denied the appellant's claim and stated that the property was developed by their late father, who had been living with the appellant's father.

Issues

1. Whether the trial magistrate made the correct finding that the appellant was the owner of the suit property.
2. Whether the suit ought to have been instituted against the respondents or the administrator of their late father's estate.
3. Whether the respondents were trespassers to the suit property and liable to be evicted therefrom.
4. Whether the respondents were liable to account for the rent they had collected since 1998.

Reasoning

The court found that the respondents had evidence showing their late father's purchase and development of the property before cohabiting with the appellant. The appellant did not provide evidence of her purchase or development of the property, nor did she explain why she did not claim against her father in his lifetime.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondents.