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

Dakawou Transport Limited v Katana Kalume Nassoro & 8 others [2017] KEELC 1860 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 1860 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
1860
Citation
[2017] KEELC 1860 (KLR)
Decided
19 September 2017
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLand DisputePostureOriginal TrialCoramJ. O. OLOLA
Holding

The Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of ownership and a mandatory injunction to remove the Defendants from the suit property.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Dakawou Transport Limited, claimed ownership and possession of two parcels of land in Vipingo, Kilifi County. The Defendants, Katana Kalume Nassoro and others, were occupying and encroaching on these lands.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff has established proprietary interest in the suit property.
  2. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the Prayers sought.

Reasoning

The Plaintiff provided a Sale Agreement and certificates of title showing the land was initially registered in the witness's name and subsequently transferred to the Plaintiff Company. The Defendants' continued occupation is considered trespass.

Outcome

The Plaintiff's case is allowed, and the Plaintiff shall have the costs of the suit.

Orders

  • A declaration that the Plaintiff is the lawful and absolute owner of the parcels of land.
  • A mandatory injunction compelling the defendants to remove the structures extending into the Plaintiff’s parcel of land.
  • An Order of permanent injunction to restrain the Defendants from dealing with the property.
  • The Plaintiff shall have the costs of the suit.

Remedies

  • Declaration of ownership
  • Eviction of Defendants
  • Permanent injunction
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case