The Judiciary has initiated an investigation into a case where a Magistrate issued two contradictory judgments in a land dispute involving a widow from Bondo, Siaya County. In a statement released on Friday, the Judiciary expressed that the situation “raises serious concerns regarding the Judiciary’s fundamental responsibility for 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 has acknowledged that the preliminary investigation into the conflicting judgments in the land dispute case revealed the need for more thorough inquiry, and the investigation is currently ongoing.
This follows a plea from the family in Bondo for the Chief Justice’s intervention after Senior Principal Magistrate John Paul Nandi issued two contradictory rulings in a case involving family land. Sabina Akinyi Masogo, from Sakwa Kaduodi village near Bondo town, is now unsure which judgment to follow after Magistrate Nandi initially ruled in her favor but issued a different ruling ten days later.
Sabina sought justice in court after a man married to her late husband’s sister allegedly fraudulently transferred a parcel of land belonging to her late husband into his own name. She claims that the man tricked her late husband, Dominic Masogo Umaya, into handing over the title deed for safekeeping, only to later change it into his name.
On June 26, 2024, the Bondo law courts delivered a judgment in her favor, directing the sub-county lands registrar to update the records and restore the title deed to its rightful owner. The court found that the title deed held by the first defendant, related to the parcel of land registered as South Sakwa/Barkowino/2805, was obtained through fraud and should be canceled.
“Further, this court has hold and found that the deceased, Domnic 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 filed a lawsuit against her in-law, Joseph Agola Adundo, and the Bondo District Land Registrar, who were the first and second respondents, respectively. However, her initial relief was short-lived. Within two weeks of the ruling, Sabina discovered that the information on the judiciary portal differed significantly from the court’s actual decision.
This discrepancy became apparent when her lawyer, Ruth Otieno, prepared a decree to be served on both the in-law and the land registrar and brought it to the Bondo law courts for certification and stamping. According to lawyer Otieno, she was taken aback when court officials informed her that the ruling did not actually favor 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 lodged an appeal on the matter.
