It's a sigh of relief for a family in Thika after they were able to regain control of their 85.3 acres of land following endless court battles.
This is after the court of appeal dismissed a case by some 74 people who were seeking to block their eviction from the disputed land.
Joseph Githu Ibau and 73others were asking the appellate court to suspend a decision by the High Court issued in July last year that would have seen them evicted from the land.
The High Court threw out their case because the issues they were raising had already been determined to be final.
But the Court of Appeal Judge Asike-Makhandia, Mumbi Ngugi and Mwaniki Gachoka dismissed their application affirming the land belonged to the estate of Mary Wairimu Dames and that Langata Development Company Ltd, had no basis to involve third parties.
Lang'ata Development is a land-buying company.
"Granting such an order in the circumstances will be tantamount to giving a seal of approval of their mischief. On the whole, therefore, the application fails and is dismissed," said the Judges.
The suit started in 2016 when Justice Lucy Gacheru issued an order requiring Langata Development Company to return the 85.3 acres to Mary or compensate her.
The company, in turn, went to the Court of Appeal to contest the decision, arguing that no fraud was proved by the widow. They then turned the heat on her land surveyors.
The Court of Appeal had ruled that the land in contention legally belonged to Mary and criticised the land-buying company for dishonesty in executing the sale agreement.
Aggrieved, the company moved to the Supreme Court seeking to have the late appeal allowed.
They also wanted the court to certify that the intended appeal raised questions of general public importance on the interpretation and application of Section 23 of the Registration of Titles Act (now repealed by the Land Registration Act No. 3 of 2013).
Supreme Court judges found that the company had failed to satisfactorily explain the “inordinate delay in lodging the notice of appeal to warrant an exercise of the court’s discretion to enlarge time”.
The judges also declined a request by the company led by its director, Eliud Kariuki, to review a ruling of the Court of Appeal dated July 19, 2019, that had stopped it from taking the battle, which had been in court since 2011, to the Supreme Court.
