[2014] KEHC 5534 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the suit land and that the defendant had previously entered and cultivated the land without any legal right or consent. The defendant failed to oppose the application or present any evidence to justify his actions. The applicant established a prima facie...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 5534 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Albert Alexander Aggrey Ekirapa; Defendant: Isaac Muchilwa
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 78 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Injunction Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Injunction granted against the defendant as prayed. Costs awarded to the applicant.
- Judges
- EO Obaga
- Legal Topics
- Injunctions, Trespass, Ownership Disputes
- 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
Albert Alexander Aggrey Ekirapa
Plaintiff
Isaac Muchilwa
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with land parcel Trans-Nzoia/Gidea/29.
- 2 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case with a probability of success.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the suit land and that the defendant had previously entered and cultivated the land without any legal right or consent. The defendant failed to oppose the application or present any evidence to justify his actions. The applicant established a prima facie case with a probability of success, warranting the grant of an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendant from further interference with the land until the suit is determined.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Injunction granted against the defendant as prayed. Costs awarded to the applicant.
Orders
- An injunction is issued restraining the defendant, his agents, servants, and/or any other person acting through him or claiming interest through him from cultivating, leasing, trespassing on, selling, claiming, occupying and/or dealing in any manner with land parcel No. Trans-Nzoia/Gidea/29 until determination of...
- The applicant shall have the costs of this application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KITALE
LAND CASE NO. 78 OF 2013
ALBERT ALEXANDER AGGREY EKIRAPA …................ PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ISAAC MUCHILWA ….................................................. DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
The applicant herein Albert Alexander Aggrey Ekirapa brought a notice of motion dated 30th February, 2014 in which he sought an order of injunction against the defendant restraining him, his agents, servants and/or any other person acting through him or claiming interest through him from cultivating, leasing, trespassing on, selling, claiming, occupying and or dealing in any manner with land parcel No. Trans-Nzoia/Gidea/29.
The defendant who was duly served neither entered appearance nor filed any replying affidavit or grounds of opposition to the application. The applicant contends that he is the proprietor of the suit land which measures 26. 6 hactares. In the year 2012, thedefendant/respondent moved into the property and cultivated 10 acres. He planted and harvested. In the year 2013 he did the same thing. The applicant therefore prays for an injunction seeking to stop the respondent from cultivating the land until determination of this suit.
I have looked at the application which is not opposed. The applicant has demonstrated that he is the registered owner of the land. The respondent who has cultivated the applicant's land on two previous occasions has no business doing so for a third time. I find that the applicant has demonstrated that he has a prima facie case with probability of success. I allow the application with the result that an injunction is issued against the defendant in terms of prayer (3) of the motion. The applicant shall also have the costs of this application.
It is so ordered.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kitale on this 30th day of April, 2014.
E. OBAGA
JUDGE
COURT: Ruling delivered in the absence of the applicant who was aware of today's date. Court clerk – Kassachoon.
E. OBAGA,
JUDGE
30/4/2014