[2022] KEELC 2559 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 2559 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case with a likelihood of success, having resided on the suit property for over 20 years and claiming adverse possession. The court held that eviction would cause irreparable harm to the applicant and his family, as it would force them to vacate their...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 2559 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Albert Odhiambo Adongo; Respondent: Ndinya Andiego Odhiambo; Respondent: Chairman B.O.M AIC Olago Aluoch Girls Secondary School; Respondent: Principal Secretary Treasury Sued as the Trustee of AIC Olago Aluoch Girls Secondary School; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E6 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interim Injunction Application
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
A Ombwayo
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Interim Injunction, Status Quo Orders, Eviction, Land Ownership Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Adverse Possession Interim Injunction Status Quo Orders Eviction Land Ownership Disputes

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Albert Odhiambo Adongo

Applicant

Ndinya Andiego Odhiambo

Respondent

Chairman B.O.M AIC Olago Aluoch Girls Secondary School

Respondent

Principal Secretary Treasury Sued as the Trustee of AIC Olago Aluoch Girls Secondary School

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interim Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case for an interim injunction based on adverse possession.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if evicted from the suit property before the determination of the suit.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favors granting the interim injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case with a likelihood of success, having resided on the suit property for over 20 years and claiming adverse possession. The court held that eviction would cause irreparable harm to the applicant and his family, as it would force them to vacate their home. The balance of convenience was found to favor the applicant, as he would be more inconvenienced by eviction than the respondents would be by the maintenance of the status quo. Consequently, the court granted an interim injunction restraining the respondents from evicting the applicant or interfering with the suit property pending the hearing and determination of the suit.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Pending the hearing and determination of this suit, an order of interim injunction is granted restraining the respondents, their servants, agents, workers, proxies, representatives and/or any other person assigned or with their authority from evicting the applicant and his family from Kisumu/Nyahera/2260 and...
  • Costs of this application be in the cause.