KDF vacate 90 acres of land in Kayole, per a Supreme Court order
KDF vacate 90 acres of land in Kayole, per a Supreme Court order
KDF vacate 90 acres of land in Kayole, per a Supreme Court order
Since the Supreme Court determined that the 90 acres of property belong to Nairobi County, The Kenya Defense Forces (KDF) have lost possession of Embakasi Barracks.
The Department of Defense established that it has had exclusive use of the property since 1986, according to a judgement by the Supreme Court, but it was unable to demonstrate how it came to have legal title to the site.
The court determined that KDF had no legal right to the land despite acting with the full knowledge and consent of the former Nairobi City Council (NCC) and the Commissioner of Lands.
The judges declared that Nairobi County, the legal heir to the long-gone Nairobi City Council, nevertheless holds title to the suit property as things are right now.
The Supreme Court ruled on an appeal brought by Torino Enterprises, who sought to claim ownership of the property.
After losing a case in which it sought Ksh15 billion in damages from the Department of Defense for occupying the land, Torino moved to the Supreme Court.
The corporation was claimed by the court to not be the land’s owner. The land was a component of 5639 acres with a freehold title in Embakasi, the court reported. On February 21, 1964, the property was partitioned into smaller pieces and given to Kayle Estates Limited.
On November 22, 1971, the parcel was subsequently given to the now-defunct Nairobi City Council (NCC). The land was divided into eight lots, the largest of which, LR No. 22524, Grant No. IR 85966, measuring 83.910 Hectares, was created in 1973.
According to testimony given to the Supreme Court, Torino purchased the property from NCC using an allotment letter dated December 19, 1999. The business claimed that the Department of Defense (DoD) had fenced off 90 acres and trespassed.
In response to a violation of its property rights, the corporation requested orders and damages. The Supreme Court ruled that KDF’s occupation of the property . As well as its retention and ongoing occupation amounted to an unlawful compulsory acquisition.
The Court of Appeal overruled the High Court on the first appeal . And dismissed the case on the grounds that the suit property did not qualify as unalienated public land under Section 2 of the Government Lands Act (repealed). The judges declared.
The Commissioner of Lands had no authority to transfer or distribute it since as the court noted, it was private property.
As a result, the court found that the private firm had not established a legitimate ownership . Or interest in the suit property.
