Farmer wins Sh800m land case against firm

By TITUS TOO

A South African farmer based in Uasin Gishu has won a Sh800 million land case against a Kalenjin investment trust, EMO.

This came after the High Court in Eldoret dismissed an application by EMO seeking to bar Stephanus Petrus Kruger from disposing off his land parcels totaling 5,000 acres.

The organisation had claimed Kruger breached a sale agreement they had entered to buy the land.

EMO moved to court seeking to restrain the farmer from disposing or subdividing for sale the parcels LR 21792/3, 2179/4, 9127, 9278 and 8522 or any movable property in it.

In its plaint, EMO said it entered into a sale agreement with Kruger in September 2008 for the purchase of the land parcels and properties at a cost of Sh800 million.

Through lawyer Hillary Chemitei, EMO told the court the farmer breached the agreement and went ahead to subdivide the land parcels for sale to third parties despite receiving Sh112 million from the trust.

EMO made the application in an affidavit sworn by Rev John Kimeli Kipsangut, the investment director who stated how the Sh112 million had been paid to Kruger as deposit.

The organisation filed the suit on behalf of its over 400 shareholders in a plaint dated November 15, last year. The farmer had placed an advert in a local daily advertising the sale of his farm located in Uasin Gishu County prompting the suit.

In his defence, Kruger stated that EMO failed to abide by the terms of the agreement due to the organisation’s inability to pay Sh252 million deposit as agreed. The organisation, he admitted, had only paid him Sh112 million, which was below the agreed deposit.

Expiry of date

He said he was at liberty to sell the suit land as stipulated in the agreement after issuing a notice.

In her ruling, Eldoret High Court Judge Philomena Mwilu concurred with Kruger that EMO was in breach of a requirement in full payment of deposit of purchase price.

She said dealings after the expiry of the date of payment were outside the agreement between the two.

Ms Mwilu added that the court, therefore, could not be enjoined to re-write the contract for the two parties.

"I find that the applicant breached the contract when it failed to abide by the clause as to the payment of the deposit of the sale price in the manner therein provided," said Mwilu.