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

Okech v Oloo (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E017 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 7527 (KLR) (30 October 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KEELC 7527 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
7527
Citation
[2025] KEELC 7527 (KLR)
Decided
30 October 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLand DisputePostureAppeal from the original trialCoramASATI
Holding

The court held that the plaintiff did not acquire title to the suit land by adverse possession and dismissed the suit.

Facts

Ayub Ochieng Okech claimed adverse possession of the land known as Kisumu/manyatta “A”/1461, which he inherited from his parents. Thomas Omondi Oloo claimed the land as his inherited from his father. The suit was brought under sections 37 and 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act and section 28 of the Land Registration Act.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff has acquired title to the suit land by adverse possession.
  2. Whether the suit land should now be registered in the name of the plaintiff pursuant to the doctrine of adverse possession.
  3. Costs of the suit.

Reasoning

The court found that the plaintiff did not prove that he had used the land openly, continuously, and without permission for the required period. The court also noted that the plaintiff did not provide evidence to support his claim of building on the land and burying relatives on it.

Outcome

The suit was dismissed.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Limitation of Actions Act (Cap. 22)
  • Land Registration Act (No.3 of 2012)
Cases cited (2)
  • Gabriel Mbui vs Mukindia Maranya [1993] eKLR
  • Ravindranath Dahybhai Bhagat v Hamisi Haro & 5 others [2014] eKLR
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case