Kaumbuthu (Suing as the Legal Representative of Douglas Kaumbuthu – Deceased) v Board of Management, Njotene Primary School & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E002 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 2064 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Land Adjudication Directorate was ordered to pay a deceased man's estate Kshs 9.8 million for failing to deliver promised compensation land.
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 Directorate of Land Adjudication and Settlement compensated the late Douglas Kaumbuthu for his 14 acres it took from him for the expansion of Njotene Primary School, in terms of the arrangement it had with him
- 2.Whether the estate of the late Douglas Kaumbuthu is entitled to the reliefs that are sought in this suit
- 3.What order should be made with regard to costs of the suit
Key legal issues
#Whether the late Kaumbuthu was compensated with the agreed 30 acres
The court found the Directorate failed to give the deceased the 30 acres agreed when his 14 acres were taken for the school
The Minister's September 2022 award confirmed the agreed compensation was 30 acres. The Directorate claimed compensation of three parcels totaling 20.5 acres, two of which fell in Mbwaa 1 Adjudication Section after a Court of Appeal order. It tendered no evidence of demarcation or registration of compensation land in the deceased's favour and could not locate the alleged 1.5 acres. Being custodian of the adjudication registers, the Directorate should have availed such evidence; none was availed.
Which reliefs the estate was entitled to
Monetary compensation in lieu of land; excision of 14 acres from the school refused
The estate conceded the adjudication register was closed, making demarcation of 30 acres impractical. The default relief of excising 14 acres from the school's land was refused because the school serves a public purpose, has developed the land since the 1980s, and excision would amount to an illegal reversal of the Minister's award through an ordinary civil suit. The only available relief was monetary compensation under prayer (b).
Quantum of compensation
The court assessed the 14 acres at Kshs 700,000 per acre, totaling Kshs 9,800,000
PW1, a registered land valuer, assessed the value of one acre at between Kshs 700,000 and Kshs 800,000 in a valuation report dated 20/2/2024. No other valuation evidence was tendered. In the absence of contrary evidence, the court adopted the lower figure as a fair open market value per acre.
Legal principles established
#- A deprivation of land under an adjudication compensation arrangement cannot pass without a remedy
- Where a party responsible for adjudication records fails to avail evidence of registration of compensation land, the court may infer non-compensation
- Costs follow the event under Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff against the 2nd defendant for Kshs 9,800,000 together with interest at court rate from the date of the judgment
- 2.The 2nd defendant shall bear the plaintiff's costs of this suit
- 3.No award of costs to the 1st and 3rd defendants
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over land disputes
Relief refused
#Order compelling the defendants to show, put in occupation and register 30 acres in the name of the plaintiff
The plaintiff conceded the Ruiri Rwarera adjudication register was closed and there was no vacant land available
Order decreeing that the 14 acres surrendered by the deceased be hived from the 1st defendant's land and re-transferred back to the deceased's estate
The school serves a public purpose; such relief would reverse the Minister's award through an ordinary civil suit and would gravely hurt the general public
Costs
The 2nd defendant to bear the plaintiff's costs; the 1st and 3rd defendants, being necessary parties represented by the Office of the Attorney General, receive no award of costs.
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.
In the end, the plaintiff's claim succeeds and is allowed in the following terms: (a) Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the plaintiff against the 2nd defendant for Kshs 9,800,000 together with interest at court rate from the date of this judgment. (b) The 2nd defendant shall bear the plaintiff's costs of this suit.
Neither the retired Constitution nor the current Constitution would permit such a deprivation of land to pass without a remedy.
the court finds that the Directorate of Land and Settlement has failed to give the late Kaumbuthu the 30 acres the Land Adjudication Committee in Ruiri Rwarera Adjudication Section agreed to give him
the general principle under Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act is that costs follow the event
Issues in the judgment
#Defendants' written submissions dated 16/2/2025 conflict with the record showing trial hearing concluded on 5/11/2025; the court notes a typographical error
The acreages of parcels 3133 and 4320 are inconsistently stated between the pleading summary and the evidence summary (13/6 acres swapped)
The judgment contains an incomplete sentence regarding the decree and certificate of costs
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kaumbuthu (Suing as the Legal Representative of Douglas Kaumbuthu – Deceased) v Board of Management, Njotene Primary School & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E002 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 2064 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELCL CASE NO. E002 OF 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2064/eng@2026-04-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.