Background and Introduction
1. This ruling is in respect of the Notice of Motion dated 8th December 2025, brought by the Decree Holders seeking, in summary the ratification of a private treaty sale of Kitale Municipality Block 15/Koitogos/3147 ("the suit property") as a lawful execution sale, a transfer and/or vesting order in favour of the Objector/Respondent, Sammy Ratemo Kinara, as purchaser, authority to the Deputy Registrar to execute all documents necessary to effect transfer, consequential orders compelling the Land Registrar and/or Chief Land Registrar to register the vesting order and issue a new certificate of title in the purchaser's name and an order that each party bear its own costs.
2. The affidavits of service on record confirm that the application was duly served on the Objector who filed no response. The said Objector attended Court and confirmed that he supported the application. The application being unopposed does not, however, relieve this Court of its duty to satisfy itself, on the material placed before it, that the orders sought are proper and are consistent with the record of these proceedings, more so given the unusual procedural history of this matter.
Analysis and Determination
3. It is well established that execution proceedings are intended to be conducted under the close supervision of the court that issued the decree, and that the court retains inherent jurisdiction to make such orders as are necessary to give effect to, and to regularize transactions arising from, its own execution process. As stated by the Applicants, the purpose of execution is to enable a successful litigant to realize the fruits of a lawfully obtained judgment, a principle affirmed in Machira t/a Machira & Co. Advocates v East African Standard [2002] eKLR.
4. I agree with the Applicants on the submission that the court’s supervisory jurisdiction over execution proceedings necessarily includes the power to regularize transactions that arise from lawful execution processes. More specifically, the power of the Court to issue vesting orders is found in Section 48 of the Trustee Act which provides that
“Where any court gives a judgment or makes an order directing the sale or mortgage of any land, every person who is entitled to or possessed of any interest in the land, or entitled to a contingent right therein, and is a party to the action or proceeding in which the judgment or order is given or made or is otherwise bound by the judgment or order, shall be deemed to be so entitled or possessed as the case may be, as a trustee for the purposes of this Act. And the court may make an order vesting the land or any part thereof for such estate or interest as the court thinks fit in the purchaser or mortgagee or in any other person.”
5. On the record before me, there is no contestation that the suit property was lawfully attached pursuant to warrants issued following the dismissal of the objection proceedings. The private treaty sale that followed arose directly from. There is no allegation, and no evidence to impugne the sale. To the contrary, it resulted in full satisfaction of the decretal sum and execution costs, to the Decree Holders' own acknowledged satisfaction.
6. Further, the record shows that the registered proprietor of the suit property, the Interested Party Benson Kioko Makau, to whom title reverted following cancellation of the Respondent's earlier, tainted registration, disclaimed, in his sworn testimony in the objection proceedings, any continuing interest in the property, having sold it to the 1st Judgment Debtor in 2016. Notwithstanding diligent and bona fide efforts to trace him for purposes of securing his cooperation in executing the necessary transfer instruments, he has remained untraceable.
7. In these circumstances, requiring the purchaser to await the voluntary cooperation of a proprietor who has disclaimed interest in the property and cannot in any event be located would serve no purpose beyond occasioning further delay, hardship and expense, and would frustrate rather than advance the object of execution which is full satisfaction of which has, on this record, already been achieved.
8. I am guided in this regard by the observation in Nairobi City County v Mwangi; Kingori (Purchaser); Mwangi (Applicant) [2024] eKLR, where Mboya J affirmed that the court, as a court of both law and equity, is vested with the requisite mandate and inherent jurisdiction to ensure that the ends of justice are achieved and injustice averted, that jurisdiction being wide in its extent and scope. I find that this is a proper case for its exercise.
9. I am satisfied, on the material before me, that the decretal sum, interest and execution costs owed to the Decree Holders have been paid in full, the sale by private treaty was concluded pursuant to, and did not circumvent, the lawful execution process sanctioned by this Court, the registered proprietor has disclaimed any interest in the property and cannot be traced to execute the necessary instruments and that the application is in any case unopposed. The conditions for the issuance of a vesting order are accordingly met.
Disposition
10. Accordingly, I allow the application dated 8th December 2025 and make the following final orders:
i. The private treaty sale of Kitale Municipality Block 15/Koitogos/3147, concluded pursuant to the warrants of sale extracted in execution of the decree herein, is hereby affirmed and ratified as a lawful execution sale.
ii. A vesting order is hereby issued, declaring Sammy Ratemo Kinara the lawful purchaser of the suit property.
iii. The Deputy Registrar of this Court is hereby authorised to execute, on behalf of the registered proprietor, all instruments and documents necessary to effect the transfer and vesting of the suit property in favour of the said purchaser.
iv. The Land Registrar, Kitale, and/or the Chief Land Registrar are hereby directed to:
a) register this Court's transfer/vesting order against the land register in respect of the suit property; and
b) issue a new certificate of title in the name of the purchaser, Sammy Ratemo Kinara, upon presentation of this order and payment of the requisite statutory fees.
v. Each party shall bear its own costs of this application.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI
THIS 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026.
F. MUGAMBI
JUDGE
Delivered in the presence of
Ms Kayugira for the Decree Holders/Applicant
Ratemo Sammy Kinara the Objector/Respondent in person
Lilian & Gloria – Court Assistants
1. This ruling is in respect of the Notice of Motion dated 8th December 2025, brought by the Decree Holders seeking, in summary the ratification of a private treaty sale of Kitale Municipality Block 15/Koitogos/3147 ("the suit property") as a lawful execution sale, a transfer and/or vesting order in favour of the Objector/Respondent, Sammy Ratemo Kinara, as purchaser, authority to the Deputy Registrar to execute all documents necessary to effect transfer, consequential orders compelling the Land Registrar and/or Chief Land Registrar to register the vesting order and issue a new certificate of title in the purchaser's name and an order that each party bear its own costs.
2. The affidavits of service on record confirm that the application was duly served on the Objector who filed no response. The said Objector attended Court and confirmed that he supported the application. The application being unopposed does not, however, relieve this Court of its duty to satisfy itself, on the material placed before it, that the orders sought are proper and are consistent with the record of these proceedings, more so given the unusual procedural history of this matter.
Analysis and Determination
3. It is well established that execution proceedings are intended to be conducted under the close supervision of the court that issued the decree, and that the court retains inherent jurisdiction to make such orders as are necessary to give effect to, and to regularize transactions arising from, its own execution process. As stated by the Applicants, the purpose of execution is to enable a successful litigant to realize the fruits of a lawfully obtained judgment, a principle affirmed in Machira t/a Machira & Co. Advocates v East African Standard [2002] eKLR.
4. I agree with the Applicants on the submission that the court’s supervisory jurisdiction over execution proceedings necessarily includes the power to regularize transactions that arise from lawful execution processes. More specifically, the power of the Court to issue vesting orders is found in Section 48 of the Trustee Act which provides that
“Where any court gives a judgment or makes an order directing the sale or mortgage of any land, every person who is entitled to or possessed of any interest in the land, or entitled to a contingent right therein, and is a party to the action or proceeding in which the judgment or order is given or made or is otherwise bound by the judgment or order, shall be deemed to be so entitled or possessed as the case may be, as a trustee for the purposes of this Act. And the court may make an order vesting the land or any part thereof for such estate or interest as the court thinks fit in the purchaser or mortgagee or in any other person.”
5. On the record before me, there is no contestation that the suit property was lawfully attached pursuant to warrants issued following the dismissal of the objection proceedings. The private treaty sale that followed arose directly from. There is no allegation, and no evidence to impugne the sale. To the contrary, it resulted in full satisfaction of the decretal sum and execution costs, to the Decree Holders' own acknowledged satisfaction.
6. Further, the record shows that the registered proprietor of the suit property, the Interested Party Benson Kioko Makau, to whom title reverted following cancellation of the Respondent's earlier, tainted registration, disclaimed, in his sworn testimony in the objection proceedings, any continuing interest in the property, having sold it to the 1st Judgment Debtor in 2016. Notwithstanding diligent and bona fide efforts to trace him for purposes of securing his cooperation in executing the necessary transfer instruments, he has remained untraceable.
7. In these circumstances, requiring the purchaser to await the voluntary cooperation of a proprietor who has disclaimed interest in the property and cannot in any event be located would serve no purpose beyond occasioning further delay, hardship and expense, and would frustrate rather than advance the object of execution which is full satisfaction of which has, on this record, already been achieved.
8. I am guided in this regard by the observation in Nairobi City County v Mwangi; Kingori (Purchaser); Mwangi (Applicant) [2024] eKLR, where Mboya J affirmed that the court, as a court of both law and equity, is vested with the requisite mandate and inherent jurisdiction to ensure that the ends of justice are achieved and injustice averted, that jurisdiction being wide in its extent and scope. I find that this is a proper case for its exercise.
9. I am satisfied, on the material before me, that the decretal sum, interest and execution costs owed to the Decree Holders have been paid in full, the sale by private treaty was concluded pursuant to, and did not circumvent, the lawful execution process sanctioned by this Court, the registered proprietor has disclaimed any interest in the property and cannot be traced to execute the necessary instruments and that the application is in any case unopposed. The conditions for the issuance of a vesting order are accordingly met.
Disposition
10. Accordingly, I allow the application dated 8th December 2025 and make the following final orders:
i. The private treaty sale of Kitale Municipality Block 15/Koitogos/3147, concluded pursuant to the warrants of sale extracted in execution of the decree herein, is hereby affirmed and ratified as a lawful execution sale.
ii. A vesting order is hereby issued, declaring Sammy Ratemo Kinara the lawful purchaser of the suit property.
iii. The Deputy Registrar of this Court is hereby authorised to execute, on behalf of the registered proprietor, all instruments and documents necessary to effect the transfer and vesting of the suit property in favour of the said purchaser.
iv. The Land Registrar, Kitale, and/or the Chief Land Registrar are hereby directed to:
a) register this Court's transfer/vesting order against the land register in respect of the suit property; and
b) issue a new certificate of title in the name of the purchaser, Sammy Ratemo Kinara, upon presentation of this order and payment of the requisite statutory fees.
v. Each party shall bear its own costs of this application.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI
THIS 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026.
F. MUGAMBI
JUDGE
Delivered in the presence of
Ms Kayugira for the Decree Holders/Applicant
Ratemo Sammy Kinara the Objector/Respondent in person
Lilian & Gloria – Court Assistants