In a recent ruling that brought unexpected humor to the courtroom, Justice Boaz Olao of the Busia High Court used a colorful analogy to address a land dispute involving three men and a pastor. Comparing the case to “two bald-headed men fighting over a comb” and likening it to “carnivores brawling over dead prey while vultures hover above,” Justice Olao delivered a judgment that left both the plaintiffs and the respondent in fits of laughter.
Justice Olao explained that while the parties were entangled in their legal battle over the parcel of land, the true owner—the Principal Secretary of the Treasury on behalf of Bujuanga Nursery School—must have been watching the drama with amusement. The judge ultimately decided to return the land to the government and advised the litigants to reflect on his analogy.
The dispute centered around land No. Bunyala/Mudembi/1859, which the plaintiffs—Fredrick Barasa Ouma, Silvester John Omala, and Tuberius Odhiambo Malova—claimed was reserved for the Abachonga community and meant for Bujuanga Nursery School. They sought to evict the Free Pentecostal Fellowship in Kenya and Pastor Joseph Ogesa Wafula from the land, asserting it belonged to the community.
Pastor Ogesa and the church argued that the land had been registered under the Principal Secretary’s name but had been used by the church since 1965. They denied the plaintiffs’ claims and challenged their authority to represent the community.
Justice Olao reviewed the land’s registration history, noting that it was first registered under the Busia County Council in 1985 and later transferred to the National Treasury PS for Bujuanga Nursery School. The evidence showed no connection to the Abachonga community, contrary to the plaintiffs’ claims.
The judge criticized both parties for their unfounded claims, finding that neither had provided substantial evidence of ownership. He noted that if the defendants had once held a title deed that was surrendered to the Busia County government, it implied they relinquished any interest in the land.
Justice Olao dismissed the plaintiffs’ suit, ordering them to pay the defendants’ costs and emphasizing that the land’s ownership dispute was baseless. He described the plaintiffs as “busybodies” with no standing to seek eviction orders, highlighting that their lack of legal ground or proprietary interest rendered their claim futile.
