[2023] KEELC 17911 (KLR)
The court found that, since both parties through their respective counsel agreed to compromise the application on terms of maintaining the status quo, it was appropriate to order that the applicants and respondent maintain the prevailing status quo over the suit land. Specifically, each party is to occupy their...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 17911 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Felgona Akelo; Applicant: Joseph Opap O’chieng; Applicant: John Arunda O’chieng; Applicant: Joel Oindo O’chieng; Defendant: Eunice Ouma Oranga
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E008 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Status Quo Orders
- Outcome
- Application compromised by consent; status quo to be maintained.
- Judges
- GMA Ongondo
- Legal Topics
- Status Quo Orders, Land Possession, Interlocutory Injunctions
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Felgona Akelo
Applicant
Joseph Opap O’chieng
Applicant
John Arunda O’chieng
Applicant
Joel Oindo O’chieng
Applicant
Eunice Ouma Oranga
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Status Quo Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should grant orders to maintain the status quo regarding possession, user, occupation, and registration of land parcel Central Kasipul/Kamuma/59 pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether parties should be restrained to their respective portions of the suit land until the suit is heard and determined.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, since both parties through their respective counsel agreed to compromise the application on terms of maintaining the status quo, it was appropriate to order that the applicants and respondent maintain the prevailing status quo over the suit land. Specifically, each party is to occupy their respective portions of Central Kasipul/Kamuma/59 pending the hearing and determination of the main suit. The court was guided by the principle that status quo orders serve to preserve the subject matter of litigation and prevent prejudice to any party before the substantive issues are resolved. Costs of the application were ordered to be in the cause.
Court Disposition
Application compromised by consent; status quo to be maintained.
Orders
- Applicants and respondent to maintain the prevailing status quo over Central Kasipul/Kamuma/59.
- Each party to occupy their respective portions of the suit land pending hearing and determination of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Akelo & 3 others v Oranga (Environment & Land Case E008 of 2023) [2023] KEELC 17911 (KLR) (12 June 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 17911 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
Environment & Land Case E008 of 2023
GMA Ongondo, J
June 12, 2023
IN THE MATTER OF THE LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF LAND PARCEL REFERENCE, NO CENTRAL KASIPUL/KAMUMA/59
Between
Felgona Akelo
1st Applicant
Joseph Opap O’chieng
2nd Applicant
John Arunda O’chieng
3rd Applicant
Joel Oindo O’chieng
4th Applicant
and
Eunice Ouma Oranga
Defendant
Ruling
1. In an application by way of notice of Motion dated April 10, 2023, the applicants through Wanza Kivindu and Company Advocates, have sought, interalia;“In alternative this Honourable court be pleased to order the status quo prevailing as at April 1, 2023 regarding possession, user, occupation and registration of the parcel of land known as Central Kasipul/Kamuma/59 by the Applicants pending the hearing and determination of this application inter-partes or until further Court orders”.
2. The respondent through Muma Nyagaka and Company Advocates opposed the application by way of her replying affidavit sworn on May 29, 2023.
3. Wanza Kivindu and Muma learned counsel for applicants and respondent respectively have agreed to ampromise the Notice of Motion on terms of status quo over the suit land, Central Kasipul/Kamuma 159.
4. In the foregone and being guided by the case of Ogada -versus- Mollin (2009) eKLR 620, the application is determined thus:a.The applicants and the respondents to maintain the prevailing status quo over the suit. In particular, they shall occupy their respective portions of the suit land pending the hearing and determination of this suit.b.Costs of the application in the cause.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT HOMA-BAY THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2023. G.M.A ONG’ONDOJUDGEPRESENT1. Ms. Kiundu learned counsel for the applicants2. Mr. Muma learned counsel for the respondent3. Court Assistant, Okello.