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

Zephan Kareithi and Company Limited & another v Githae & 2 others (Civil Appeal 208 of 2019) [2025] KECA 963 (KLR) (9 May 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KECA 963 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
963
Citation
[2025] KECA 963 (KLR)
Decided
9 May 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from a judgment of the Land and Environment CourtCoramJ. LESIIT, ALI-ARONI, G. V. ODUNGA
Holding

The appeal is allowed, the judgment in the lower court is set aside, and the appellants are directed to give vacant possession of the suit property to the 1st respondent within 60 days from the date of the judgment.

Facts

The 1st respondent filed a suit against the appellants alleging breach of a sale agreement and seeking orders for the transfer of the suit property and registration of the property in his name. The appellants denied the existence of the sale agreement and claimed adverse possession.

Issues

  1. existence of the sale agreement
  2. adverse possession of the suit property
  3. validity of the lease

Reasoning

The court found that the 1st respondent's possession of the suit property was not adverse, and the lease had expired, rendering the claim for adverse possession unmerited. The court also held that the learned judge had no jurisdiction to make a declaration in favor of the 1st respondent since the suit was dismissed.

Outcome

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside the judgment in Nyeri ELC Case No. 38 of 2014
  • Direct the 1st respondent to give vacant possession of the suit property to the appellants within 60 days from the date of the judgment
  • Award costs of the appeal to the appellants

Remedies

  • Vacant possession of the suit property

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Limitation of Actions Act
  • Land and Environment Court Act
Cases cited (1)
  • Abdul Rehman v R H Gudka (1957) EA 4
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