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

Terer v Chumo (Environment & Land Case 494 of 2013) [2023] KEELC 17342 (KLR) (11 May 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KEELC 17342 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
17342
Citation
[2023] KEELC 17342 (KLR)
Decided
11 May 2023
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 DisputePostureAppeal from the original trialCoramJM ONYANGO
The court finds that the plaintiff's title is not lawful and that the restriction registered against the suit parcel of land is lawful.

Facts

The plaintiff, Gedion Terer, claims to have lawfully acquired land parcel Nandi/Ndulele/1046 from the defendant, Abraham Kipruto Chumo, for Kshs. 1,000,000. The defendant disputes the payment and claims fraud. The plaintiff admits the transfer but denies fraud.

Issues

  • Whether the plaintiff lawfully acquired the suit property from the defendant
  • Whether the plaintiff's title is liable to be cancelled
  • Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs sought in the Plaint
  • Whether the defendant is entitled to the reliefs sought in the Counterclaim

Reasoning

The court determined that the plaintiff did not pay the full purchase price and did not obtain the required consent from the Land Control Board, thus his title is not valid.

Outcome

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Orders

  • A declaratory order that the plaintiff is not the lawful owner of L.R No. Nandi/Ndulele/1046
  • A permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the suit property

Remedies

  • An order for mesne profits to be assessed by the court
  • Costs of the suit
  • Interest

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • Daudi Kiptugen v Commissioner of Lands & 4 Others [2015]eKLR
⚠ 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