A case of two conflicting judgments, disputed land and a dejected widow
Bondo Law Courts.
A cloud of confusion has engulfed the home of a widow in Sakwa Kakuodi, in Bondo sub-County of Siaya after a court nullified a judgment in her favour over an inheritance of land.
Ms Sabina Akinyi Masogo had moved to court in a fight over the inheritance of the land after the death of her husband in 2016.
According to Ms Akinyi, her in-law took the title deed and fraudulently transferred the land.
“He duped my husband and acquired the land title and changed it from my late husband’s name to his,” lamented the widow who claims that is the only inheritance left for her to raise the children.
First judgement
According to the first judgment delivered on June 26 at the Bondo Law Courts, the decision was in her favour, directing the sub-county land registrar to make necessary changes in the documents.
“This court is satisfied that the certificate of title held by the first defendant in respect to the parcel of South Sakwa/Barkowino/2805 was procured through fraud and as such it is impeachable and ought to be cancelled.
“Further, this court has held and found that the deceased Domnic Masogo Umaya is the legal owner of the suit property and it is only fair that the register be rectified to cure the fraud perpetrated by the first defendant and return the suit property to the rightful owner whose ownership has not been disputed,” read part of the judgment.
In the charge sheet against fraud, Joseph Agola Adundo the in-law of the plaintiff and Bondo District Land Registrar are listed as first and second respondents respectively.
Senior Principal Magistrate John Paul Nandi further directed that necessary actions be taken to return the parcel to the plaintiff.
Things, however, turned upside down after two weeks when the advocate representing plaintiff Ruth Otieno issued a decree to effect the transfer back to the original owner.
“The judgment was read on the set date of June 26 and subsequently uploaded onto the Judiciary portal. According to this judgment which was in favour of my client, I proceeded to write a decree that would initiate the transfer, I was shocked to be informed that the judgment was different,” said Ms Otieno.
She wrote a decree two weeks after the judgment was issued.
In the second judgment, the magistrate claimed that the case filed by the plaintiff was untenable and went ahead to dismiss it.
“I find the circumstances; the plaintiff’s suit against the defendants is not tenable in view of the clear provisions of the Limitation of Actions Act. I find that the plaintiff has not been able to prove her case on balance of probabilities and hereby dismiss her case with costs to the defendant as costs follow the event,” read the second judgment.
Ms Otieno recounts the second judgment was never read in court.
“The second judgment which is in favour of the respondents was never read in court as the law dictates. When I asked him how he arrived at two judgments, he responded that the first one was a mistake that the second one stands for. I wonder how an experienced officer can write a wrong judgment and revert after two weeks,” said Ms Otieno.
Nation. Africa visited Bondo Law Courts to get the records of the two conflicting judgments and seek clarity on which one stands.
However, the magistrate is no longer stationed in Bondo, Siaya County and has since been transferred to Kimilili Law Courts in Bungoma County.
One deleted
A senior court official from Bondo Law Courts confirmed that the Judiciary portal had two judgments, however, one has since been deleted.
“From the portal, it is clear that the first judgment has been deleted. Currently, there is only one which was delivered in favour of the respondents,” said the official.
According to the law, only magistrates or judges are allowed to upload judgments to the portal; occasionally, their secretaries can upload the judgments when authorised.
While talking to journalists, Ms Akinyi claimed that before her husband died, Mr Adundo, the first respondent, approached him to develop the land jointly; the land is a prime property located in Bondo Town centre.
“Initially, my husband had a semi-permanent structure on that land. According to my in-law, the structure was not appealing owing to the prime location. Therefore, they agreed to develop it jointly, the land was never sold,” she narrated.
She further noted that after they had developed the prime land, the in-law approached them and requested to have the title deed since they developed the land together which the deceased willingly gave, not knowing that they were being duped.
Things went awry in 2014 when her husband was diagnosed with throat cancer and needed funds to seek medication.
“We wanted to use the title deed to get a loan from a local Sacco. He declined claiming that he had kept it far from reach, we did not succeed till my husband passed on in 2016,” she narrated.
After the demise of their patriarch, she was shocked when she did a land search and found out that the land title had been transferred from her husband to her in-law.
First the case was handled by the elders without success, prompting her to seek legal redress.
The family now requests Chief Justice Martha Koome to step into the matter and help them get back what rightfully belongs to them.
