The case of Harcharan Singh Sehmi & 2 Others v. Rospatech Limited & 5 Others (Environment & Land Case No. 1311 of 2014) is a significant land dispute in Kenya, decided by the Environment and Land Court in Nairobi on July 22, 2019. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi & 2 Others V Rospatech Limited & 5 Others[2019] Eklr)
Background
The plaintiffs—Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi, and Jaswaran Singh—were registered as tenants in common in equal shares of land parcel L.R. No. 209/2759/9 (I.R. No. 12263) in Ngara, Nairobi, following a transfer registered on December 7, 1968. They occupied the property from 1968 until October 2, 2014, when they were forcefully evicted. Upon eviction, Rospatech Limited (1st Defendant) and Tarabana Company Limited (2nd Defendant) took possession, presenting a new title deed for the same plot under a different I.R. number (122963), which the plaintiffs contested as fraudulent. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law, Harcharan Singh Sehmi & 2 Others V Rospatech Limited & 5 Others[2019] Eklr)
Plaintiffs’ Claims
The plaintiffs sought:
-
A permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dealing with the property. (Tarabana Company Limited v Sehmi & 7 others (Civil Appeal 463 of 2019) [2021] KECA 76 (KLR) (8 October 2021) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
-
A declaration that the defendants' titles were fraudulent and should be cancelled.
-
Registration of the plaintiffs as the rightful owners. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
-
Eviction of the defendants. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi & 2 Others V Rospatech Limited & 5 Others[2019] Eklr)
-
Special and general damages for loss of use, destruction of property, and business interruption.
Defendants’ Defense
The 1st and 2nd defendants argued that the plaintiffs’ lease had expired in 2001 and the property reverted to the government. They claimed to have lawfully acquired the property through allocation and subsequent purchase. Other defendants, including the Chief Land Registrar and the National Land Commission, denied any wrongdoing or collusion. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
Court’s Findings
The court found that: (Tarabana Company Limited v Sehmi & 7 others (Civil Appeal 463 of 2019) [2021] KECA 76 (KLR) (8 October 2021) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
-
The plaintiffs had initiated the process to extend their lease before its expiry. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
-
They continued to occupy the property after 2001, maintaining it and paying rates and rent.
-
The procedure for allocating the property to the 1st defendant under the Government Lands Act was not followed. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
-
The title held by the 1st defendant was obtained fraudulently, including under-valuation to evade stamp duty.
-
The 2nd defendant’s title was derived from the 1st defendant and was equally tainted by fraud.
Judgment
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, granting:
-
An injunction restraining the defendants from dealing with the property.
-
Cancellation of the defendants’ titles and registration of the plaintiffs as the rightful owners.
-
Eviction of the defendants within three months. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
-
General damages of Kshs. 25 million for loss and destruction. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
-
Costs of the suit to be borne by the 1st defendant. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
The court dismissed the 2nd defendant’s counterclaim, finding no merit. (Harcharan Singh Sehmi, Harbhajan Singh Sehmi & Jaswaran Singh v Rospatech Limited, Tarabana Company Limited, Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi, National Land Commission, Inspector General of Police & Attorney General (Environment & Land Case 1311 of 2014) [2019] KEELC 1981 (KLR) (Environment and Land) (22 July 2019) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
Appeal
The 2nd defendant appealed the decision in the Court of Appeal (Civil Appeal No. 463 of 2019). The appeal was heard by Justices M.S.A. Makhandia, P. Nyamweya, and J.W. Lesiit, and judgment was delivered on October 8, 2021. The outcome of the appeal is not specified in the provided sources. (Tarabana Company Limited v Sehmi & 7 others (Civil Appeal 463 of 2019) [2021] KECA 76 (KLR) (8 October 2021) (Judgment) - Kenya Law)
Significance
This case underscores the importance of due process in land transactions and the protection of property rights against fraudulent practices. It highlights the judiciary's role in upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice in land disputes.
No comments:
Post a Comment