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

Sagon Holdings Investment Company Limited v Lenkolo (Environment & Land Case 065 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 13408 (KLR) (11 October 2022) (Judgment)

[2022] KEELC 13408 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
13408
Citation
[2022] KEELC 13408 (KLR)
Decided
11 October 2022
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeLand DisputePosturePlaintiff v DefendantCoramMN GICHERU
The court finds that the plaintiff paid Kshs 6 million for the purchase of land, did not get a good title to the land, and is entitled to the orders sought.

Facts

Sagon Holdings Investment Company Limited purchased 12 acres of land in Kajiado, Kenya, in 2009. The plaintiff claimed the land was sold and transferred irregularly, unlawfully, and fraudulently. The plaintiff sought a declaration of the sale and transfer as null and void, compensation for the land, and special damages.

Issues

  • Did the plaintiff pay Kshs 6 million to the defendant for the purchase of land?
  • Did the plaintiff get a good title to the land he bought?
  • Is the plaintiff entitled to the orders sought in the plaint?

Reasoning

The court found that the plaintiff paid the defendant for the land and that the land had already been sold to someone else. The court also found that the value of the land had increased significantly.

Outcome

Judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • A declaration that the sale and transfer of LR Kajiado/Kaputiei –North/32573 and registration of the same in the name of the plaintiff was irregular, unlawful, fraudulent and therefore null and void ab initio.
  • Kshs 60,000,000/= being the value of obtaining 12 acres of land similar to LR Kajiado/Kaputiei-North/32573 (suit land).
  • Kshs 2, 320, 410/- being special damages.
  • In the alternative to (b) above, an order do issue that the defendant do compensate the plaintiff with acceptable alternative land measuring 12 acres similar to and or in the same neighborhood as LR 32573.
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case