Probe launched after Magistrate issues conflicting verdicts in Siaya woman’s land dispute
The Judiciary has initiated an investigation into a case involving a Magistrate who issued two conflicting rulings in a land dispute concerning a widow from Bondo, Siaya County.
In a statement released on Friday, the Judiciary expressed serious concerns about the case, highlighting the importance of fair justice in the matter.
“The Judiciary has quickly launched preliminary investigations, including a review of the two contradictory judgments and an inspection of the Judiciary’s Case Tracking System, where rulings and judgments are uploaded,” the statement continued.
The Judiciary acknowledged that initial investigations revealed the need for a more in-depth probe, and further investigations are now ongoing.
This development follows the Bondo family’s appeal to the Chief Justice after Senior Principal Magistrate John Paul Nandi delivered two opposing rulings in a family land dispute.
Sabina Akinyi Masogo, from Sakwa Kaduodi village, is uncertain which ruling to follow after Magistrate John Paul Nandi ruled in her favor in a land dispute but issued a conflicting ruling ten days later.
Sabina initially went to court seeking justice after her late husband’s brother-in-law allegedly transferred her late husband’s land to himself through fraudulent means.
She claims that the man convinced her late husband, Dominic Masogo Umaya, to entrust him with the land title for safekeeping, only to change it into his name later.
In a ruling delivered on June 26, 2024, the Bondo court sided with Sabina, ordering the local lands registrar to correct the records and return the land to its rightful owner.
The magistrate’s decision stated that the title held by the first defendant for the land registered as South Sakwa/Barkowino/2805 was obtained through fraud and must be canceled.
ALSO READ:
- Under and Over 7 — when the rules are simple, but the emotions are intense
- CAF Trophy Hunt: Win iPhone, MacBook, PlayStation, and other prizes in 1xBet promo!
- Rigathi Gachagua Responds to Raila Odinga’s Claim That He Can’t Fix Kenya’s Problems
- Miguna Miguna Criticizes New IEBC Chair Erastus Ethekon, Calls Him a Ruto Ally- ‘Not Independent’
- Matiang’i: No Scores to Settle, I Just Want to Fix My Country
The ruling further noted, “The court finds that the deceased, Dominic Masogo Umaya, is the rightful owner of the property, and it is only fair that the register be corrected to reverse the fraud and restore the land to its legitimate owner.”
Sabina had sued her in-law, Joseph Agola Adundo, and the Bondo District Land Registrar, the first and second respondents in the case.
However, Sabina’s relief was short-lived when, two weeks later, she discovered that the ruling uploaded on the Judiciary’s portal differed from what was delivered in court.
The discrepancy surfaced when her lawyer, Ruth Otieno, prepared a decree to serve on the in-law and the lands registrar, only to find that the court’s certification contradicted the original ruling.
Lawyer Otieno expressed shock, stating that the ruling initially uploaded to the Judiciary’s portal was in Sabina’s favor, prompting her to write a decree for land transfer.
Upon revisiting the Judiciary’s portal, however, she discovered a second ruling, this time favoring the defendant.
The second judgment, which Otieno claims was not read in open court, dismissed the widow’s case, citing the Limitations Act as grounds for the ruling.
“I find that the plaintiff failed to prove her case on the balance of probabilities and thus dismiss her claim with costs to the defendant,” read the second ruling.
Otieno sought clarification from the magistrate, who admitted the first judgment was a mistake, and the second one was the correct ruling.
“I cannot understand how a seasoned magistrate could post the wrong judgment, only to change it weeks later,” said Otieno, who has since filed an appeal on Sabina’s behalf.
Probe launched after Magistrate issues conflicting verdicts in Siaya woman’s land dispute
