Fumo v Mohamed (Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1941)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Land Registration Court established under the Land Titles Ordinance is the only competent court to adjudicate claims to unregistered immoveable property to which the Ordinance applies. Where a claimant failed to lodge a claim with the Recorder of Titles within the prescribed period, the Crown is deemed owner under section 17, and no other court has jurisdiction to determine ownership. The fact that another party lodged a claim does not confer jurisdiction on ordinary courts. Appeal allowed.
Outcome
Lower court judgment set aside; plaintiff's claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Facts
The respondent claimed ownership of Plot No. 905 in Malindi District on the ground he inherited it from his father 42 years prior and built houses on it in 1912. The appellant, as executor of an estate, sold the land by auction before the action was brought. The appellant claimed the land belonged to the estate of Brek bin Ali Fumo who inherited it 60 years ago. The purchaser attempted to register the purchase with the Recorder of Titles. The respondent admittedly never lodged a claim with the Recorder of Titles as required by section 15 of the Land Titles Ordinance, which had been applied to Malindi District from 15 January 1909. The Liwali's Court found for the respondent based solely on his having built a house 28 years prior, ignoring the Ordinance provisions.
Issues
- Whether the Liwali's Court had jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim to unregistered land to which the Land Titles Ordinance applied.
- Whether the plaintiff who failed to lodge a claim with the Recorder of Titles as required by the Ordinance could maintain an action for ownership.
- Whether the defendant who had sold the land before the action was brought had any interest in the land such that a declaration could be made against him.
Orders
- Appeal allowed with costs here and in the Court below.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Land Titles Ordinance Cap. 143 s.6
- Land Titles Ordinance Cap. 143 s.15
- Land Titles Ordinance Cap. 143 s.17
- Land Titles Ordinance Cap. 143 s.18
- Land Titles Ordinance Cap. 143 s.37
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.