Santaben Ramniklal Parmar & another v Beatrice Waruguru Gituru & 2 others [2019] KEELC 145 (KLR)

Facts

The plaintiffs and the 1st defendant were co-owners of the suit property, which was in the form of flats. The plaintiffs sought to determine their tenancy in the most practical and economical way, proposing a sale of the property and sharing of proceeds. The 1st defendant claimed that the property was capable of subdivision and that she had already sold her share to Wardpa Limited.

Issues

1. Determination of the tenancy in common between the plaintiffs and the 1st defendant
2. Validity of the agreement between the plaintiffs and the 1st defendant to sell the suit property to Wardpa Limited

Reasoning

The court found that the plaintiffs and the 1st defendant were co-owners and that the plaintiffs had the right to determine the tenancy in common through the sale of the property. The court also found that the plaintiffs had the right to determine the tenancy in common through the sale of the property.

Outcome

In favor of the plaintiffs