The Judiciary Friday launched investigations into a case where a Magistrate issued two conflicting judgments in a land dispute involving a widow in Bondo, Siaya County.
The Judiciary said the matter “raises serious concerns touching on the Judiciary’s core mandate of fair administration of justice.”
“Therefore, the Judiciary promptly commissioned preliminary examinations including review of the two alleged contradictory judgments; inspection of the Judiciary’s Case Tracking System portal where judgments and rulings are uploaded, among other enquiries,” reads the statement.
The Judiciary further acknowledged that the preliminary probes’ outcome in the judgment revealed a need for further detailed investigations, adding that the probe is underway.
This comes after the family in Bondo appealed for the indulgence of the Chief Justice after a Senior Principal Magistrate John Paul Nandi gave two conflicting rulings in a case involving family land.
Magistrates and judges enjoy judicial discretion.
Sabina Akinyi Masogo of Sakwa Kaduodi village in the outskirts of Bondo town is at a crossroads on which judgment to take after the area magistrate, John Paul Nandi ruled in her favour in a land case she had filed against her in law, only for the same magistrate to issue a different ruling ten days later.
Sabina moved to court to seek justice after a man married to his late husband’s sister allegedly transferred a parcel of land belonging to his late husband to himself fraudulently.
She says that the man duped his husband, the late Dominic Masogo Umaya to surrender the title to him for safe custody only to later change it into his name.
A judgment delivered on June 26, 2024, at the Bondo law courts ruled in her favour, with the court directing the sub-county lands registrar to make necessary changes in its records and revert the title deed to its rightful owner.
According to the magistrate’s finding, the title deed held by the first defendant, in respect of the parcel of land registered as South Sakwa/ Barkowino/2805 was procured through fraud and ought to be cancelled.
“Further, this court has hold and found that the deceased, Dominic 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 the initial judgment that was deposited in the Judiciary portal but later deleted under unknown circumstances.
Sabina had sued the in-law, Joseph Agola Adundo and Bondo District Land Registrar who were the first and second respondents respectively.
However, the widow’s celebration was short-lived as barely two weeks into the ruling; it dawned on her that what was on the judiciary portal was totally different from what was ruled.
This came into light when her advocate, Ruth Otieno prepared a decree to be served on the in-law and the lands registrar and took it to Bondo law courts for certification and stamping.
According to lawyer Otieno, she was shocked to learn from court officials that the ruling did not favour her client.
“The judgment was read on the set date of June 26th and subsequently uploaded onto the Judiciary portal” she said adding “According to this judgment which was in favour of my client; I proceeded to write a decree that would initiate the transfer.”
The information from the court officials made her revisit the Judiciary portal where, she said she was shocked to find a different ruling that favoured the defendant.
In the second judgment, said lawyer Otieno, the Magistrate claimed that the case filed by the plaintiff was untenable and not tenable in law given the clear provisions of the Limitations 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 which she said was never read in an open court.
The lawyer said she sought audience with the magistrate over the matter. He said that the first one was a mistake and the second judgment stands.
“I wonder how an experienced officer can write a wrong judgment, post it on the portal, only to revert after close to two weeks” said lawyer Otieno who has since appealed the matter.
Email your news TIPS to Editor@Kahawatungu.com — this is our only official communication channel
