[2019] KEELC 4354 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 4354 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case with a probability of success because he did not disclose the member of the Society from whom he purchased the suit land or produce a sale agreement. In contrast, the Defendant provided documentary evidence showing acquisition and occupation...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 4354 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Alex Kyalo Mutua; Defendant: Phostine Tabwe Musa
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 425 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Ownership Disputes, Land Allocation, Prima Facie Case
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctive Relief Ownership Disputes Land Allocation Prima Facie Case

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alex Kyalo Mutua

Plaintiff

Phostine Tabwe Musa

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Injunction Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff has established a prima facie case to warrant the grant of injunctive orders against the Defendant.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff will suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience tilts in favour of granting the injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case with a probability of success because he did not disclose the member of the Society from whom he purchased the suit land or produce a sale agreement. In contrast, the Defendant provided documentary evidence showing acquisition and occupation of the disputed parcels by himself, his mother, and brother. The court also noted that the Defendant is in possession of the suit land, and any injury to the Plaintiff could be compensated by damages. Therefore, the Plaintiff did not meet the threshold for the grant of an interlocutory injunction as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown & Co Ltd.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 27th February, 2018 is dismissed with costs to the Defendant.