[2018] KEELC 4548 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 4548 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiffs had established a prima facie case for the grant of a temporary injunction. The evidence showed that the suit land, Kisumu/Nyahera/2529, was a subdivision of Kisumu/Nyahera/1601, which had been registered in the name of the 1st Defendant following the death of the previous...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 4548 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Albert Ayieko Agwanda; Plaintiff: Erastus Seda Akeyo; Defendant: Lilian Awuor Ogalo; Defendant: Silas Olilo Omwa; Defendant: Caleb Odhiambo Oguya; Defendant: Pamela Achieng Odolo; Defendant: Chairman Land Control Board; Defendant: District Land Registrar Kisumu; Defendant: Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 173 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Temporary Injunction
Outcome
Plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction allowed; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
Temporary Injunctions, Land Title Registration, Succession and Administration, Status Quo Orders
Source Language
en
Land and Property Temporary Injunctions Land Title Registration Succession and Administration Status Quo Orders

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Albert Ayieko Agwanda

Plaintiff

Erastus Seda Akeyo

Plaintiff

Lilian Awuor Ogalo

Defendant

Silas Olilo Omwa

Defendant

Caleb Odhiambo Oguya

Defendant

Pamela Achieng Odolo

Defendant

Chairman Land Control Board

Defendant

District Land Registrar Kisumu

Defendant

Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Temporary Injunction

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiffs have established a prima facie case to warrant the grant of a temporary injunction restraining the Defendants from dealing with the suit land pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Who should bear the costs of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiffs had established a prima facie case for the grant of a temporary injunction. The evidence showed that the suit land, Kisumu/Nyahera/2529, was a subdivision of Kisumu/Nyahera/1601, which had been registered in the name of the 1st Defendant following the death of the previous proprietor. The Plaintiffs challenged the process of registration and subdivision, raising issues of compliance with the Law of Succession. The court noted that the 3rd and 4th Defendants were registered as proprietors, but their title was under challenge. Given the absence of a confirmed grant and the Plaintiffs' claim, the court held that it was just to preserve the status quo by...

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction allowed; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • A temporary injunction is hereby issued restraining the Defendants, their agents, servants, and employees from entering, erecting structures, or in any way dealing with land parcel Kisumu/Nyahera/2529 pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
  • Costs of the application shall be in the cause.