Chunguli & another v Isanduli (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7120 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that an adverse possession case survives even without the title extract annexed, as long as ownership isn't disputed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Originating Summons should be struck out for want of a certified copy of the register annexed to the Supporting Affidavit
- 2.Whether the Originating Summons should be struck out for lack of locus by the applicant to transfer the suit portion
- 3.Who should bear the costs of the application
Key legal issues
#Whether failure to annex a certified copy of the register/extract of title to the Supporting Affidavit is fatal to an Originating Summons for adverse possession
The omission is not fatal where the certificate of official search on record shows the registered owner and proprietorship is not in dispute
Order 37 Rule 7(2) requires an extract of title to be annexed to the Supporting Affidavit. The purpose is to enable the court ascertain the existence and proprietorship of the suit property from the onset. Here documents filed contained a certificate of official search showing the land registered in the defendant's name, so the requirement's purpose was fulfilled and striking out was unwarranted. The plaintiff was instead directed to file the extract within 14 days.
Legal principles established
#- The purpose of requiring an extract of title to be annexed to the Supporting Affidavit in an adverse possession suit is to enable the court ascertain the existence and proprietorship of the suit property; omission of the extract is not fatal where proprietorship is not in dispute
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 5th May 2025 is dismissed
- 2.Each party to bear own costs of the application
- 3.The plaintiff is directed to file and serve extract of the title (copy of register or green card) in respect of the suit land within 14 days by way of Supplementary Affidavit
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 37 Rule 7(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules
Relief refused
#Striking out of the Originating Summons for want of certified copy of register
The omission to annex the extract of title was not fatal since the purpose of the requirement was satisfied - there was no dispute the suit land was registered in the defendant's name
Striking out of the Originating Summons for lack of locus by the applicant to transfer the suit portion
The court found no dispute as to proprietorship; the extract would only be critical if there was a dispute as to the registered owner
Costs
Each party to bear own costs of the application
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The application is therefore hereby dismissed. Each party to bear own costs of the application.
The purpose of this requirement is to enable the court from the onset of the suit to ascertain existence of the suit property and proprietorship thereof.
The extract would be critical if there was a dispute as to the registered owner, which is not the case in this appeal.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment quotes the Court of Appeal decision with language referring to 'this appeal' although the instant matter is a first-instance application, an apparent unadapted quotation
The judgment records contradictory positions on the registered ownership: the application claims the defendant is not the registered owner, while the plaintiffs assert the applicant's own documents admit ownership
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Chunguli & another v Isanduli (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 7120 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/7120/eng@2025-10-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.