In Civil Appeal No. E789 of 2023, Mas Construction Limited and 7 others [2023] the Court of Appeal reaffirmed a critical principle in land ownership disputes: the first title in time prevails, and a mere certificate of title is not enough—the root of title must be proven.
Key Takeaways:
Authenticity of Title: The Abduls’ ownership of LR No. 209/1916/5 (Grant No. 94707) dates back to 1937, while the Appellant’s title (IR 147524, issued in 2013) was fraudulently obtained.
Proper Title Issuance vs. Fraudulent Claims: Ownership must follow the correct sequence:
First: A letter of allotment is issued.
Second: A Deed Plan is prepared.
Third: A Grant is registered.
The Abduls followed this process, with their letter of allotment dated 21st July 2003, leading to Deed Plan No. 244601 and Grant No. 94707 issued in 2004.
Fraud Uncovered: The Appellant’s claim was built on a falsified affidavit by the 3rd respondent, who falsely declared that Deed Plan No. 244601 had been lost. This deception enabled them to obtain a certified copy, which was then used to create a parallel grant (IR 147524)—despite IR 94707 already existing.
Critical Evidence: The original Deed File for IR 94707 mysteriously disappeared at the Lands Registry in 2013, further pointing to collusion.
Legal Precedent: Relying on Presbyterian Foundation v Kibera Siranga Self-Help Group Nursery School [2023], the Court emphasized that a good root of title must be traceable, have a recognizable description, and must not cast doubts.
Final Ruling: The Court declared the Appellant’s title null and void ab initio, awarded Kshs. 10 million in damages for trespass and demolition, and issued permanent injunctions against further interference.
Add a Comment