Opot v Osoma & another (Environment & Land Case 26 of 2021) [2023] KEELC 16453 (KLR) (23 March 2023) (Judgment)
- Court
- Environment & Land Court
- Case number
- 16453
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 16453 (KLR)
- Decided
- 23 March 2023
The court found that the plaintiff did not prove he was an adverse possessor and dismissed the suit.
Facts
The plaintiff, George Ohala Opot, claims adverse possession over land parcels North Gem/Malunga/2234, North Gem/Malunga/2235, and North Gem/Malunga/658, which he alleges were originally part of North Gem/Malunga/657. The 1st defendant, James Awimbo Osoma, is the registered proprietor of North Gem/Malunga/2234 and North Gem/Malunga/2235, while the 2nd defendant, Daniel Otieno Atieno, is the registered proprietor of North Gem/Malunga/658.
Issues
- Whether the plaintiff proved he was an adverse possessor.
- What appropriate orders should be granted?
- Who should bear the costs of this suit?
Reasoning
The court determined that the plaintiff's claim of adverse possession was not supported by evidence and that the agreement between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant was null and void.
Outcome
The plaintiff's claim was dismissed.
Authorities cited
Legislation (3)
- Limitation of Actions Act
- Land Registration Act
- Law of Succession Act
Cases cited (4)
- Ernest Wesonga Kweyu v Kweyu Omuto CA Civ Appeal no 8 of 1990
- Standard Chartered Bank Kenya Ltd v Intercom Services Ltd & 4 others [2004] eKLR
- Heptula vs Noormohamed [1984] KLR 580
- Public Trustee v Wanduru Ndegwa (Supra)
Loading judgment…