[2022] KEELC 3134 (KLR)
The court found that both parties had filed applications seeking injunctive relief to restrain the other from interfering with the suit land. Given the existence of competing claims and the need to preserve the subject matter of the dispute, the court held that the status quo as at 29/9/2021 must be maintained by...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 3134 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Asaa Tabu Asaa & 113 others; Defendant: Mohamed Said Rajab; Defendant: Naima Abdalla Issa; Defendant: Said Suleiman Said; Defendant: Jamal H. Mohamed; Defendant: Kulthum Binti Abdalla & 7 others
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Malindi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 54 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Interlocutory Application for Injunction; Ruling on Maintenance of Status Quo
- Outcome
- Status quo as at 29/9/2021 to be maintained pending further orders.
- Judges
- MAO Odeny
- Legal Topics
- Adverse Possession, Injunctive Relief, Status Quo Orders, Land 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
Asaa Tabu Asaa & 113 others
Plaintiff
Mohamed Said Rajab
Defendant
Naima Abdalla Issa
Defendant
Said Suleiman Said
Defendant
Jamal H. Mohamed
Defendant
Kulthum Binti Abdalla & 7 others
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Interlocutory Application for Injunction; Ruling on Maintenance of Status Quo
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the status quo on the suit land should be maintained pending the hearing and determination of the main suit.
- 2 Whether either party should be restrained from dealing with the suit land contrary to the court's previous orders.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that both parties had filed applications seeking injunctive relief to restrain the other from interfering with the suit land. Given the existence of competing claims and the need to preserve the subject matter of the dispute, the court held that the status quo as at 29/9/2021 must be maintained by all parties until the suit is heard and determined. The court emphasized that any disobedience of the status quo order would be punishable by law, thereby reinforcing the importance of compliance with interim court orders in land disputes.
Court Disposition
Status quo as at 29/9/2021 to be maintained pending further orders.
Orders
- The status quo obtaining as at 29/9/2021 be maintained.
- Matter to be mentioned on 13/7/2022 for further orders.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
Asaa & 113 others v Rajab & 11 others (Environment & Land Case 54 of 2020) [2022] KEELC 3134 (KLR) (7 June 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELC 3134 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Environment & Land Case 54 of 2020
MAO Odeny, J
June 7, 2022
IN THE MATTER OF: PLOT NO. 102 MALINDI, LT 37, FOLIO 501, FILE 3420 INCLUDING: SUBDIVISION NO 11020-MALINDI, LT 41, FOLIO 253, FILE 11407, SUBDIVISION NO 102/1- MALINDI, LT 45, FOLIO 57, FILE 1308 & SUBDIVISION NO. 11021-MALINDI, LT 45, FOLIO 58, FILE 13088 AND ANY OTHER SUBDIVISION THEREFROM) AND IN THE MATTER OF: AN APPLICTION FOR DECLARATION THAT THE PLAINTIFFS/APPLICANTS HAVE OBTAINED OWNERSHIP OF TWO THIRTY-FOUR DECIMAL FIVE (234. 5) ACRES OR NINE FOUR DECIMAL NINE FOUR ONE EIGHT (94. 9418) HACTARES OR THEREABOUTS OF THE ABOVE SAID PARCELS OF LAND BY WAY OF ADVERSE POSSESSION
Between
Asaa Tabu Asaa & 113 others
Plaintiff
and
Mohamed Said Rajab
1st Defendant
Naima Abdalla Issa
2nd Defendant
Said Suleiman Said
3rd Defendant
Jamal H. Mohamed
4th Defendant
Kulthum Binti Abdalla & 7 others
5th Defendant
Ruling
1. This Court had delivered a ruling dated 16/7/2021 whereby the court granted a temporary injunction restraining the Defendants from evicting, developing, selling, subdividing the suit land pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
2. The Defendants filed a similar application for injunction restraining the Plaintiffs from selling, subdividing or alienating, constructing on the suit land pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
3. The Court had ordered that status quo should be maintained pending the hearing and determination of this application inter partes. These orders are still in place.
4. The Plaintiffs are under a duty to maintain the status quo as at the time the order was issued on 29/9/2021. Any disobedience of the status quo is punishable by law.
5. I order that the status quo obtaining as at 29/9/2021 be maintained and this matter be mentioned on 13/7/2022 for further orders.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MALINDI THIS 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022. M.A. ODENYJUDGENB: In view of the Public Order No. 2 of 2021 and subsequent circular dated 28th March, 2021 from the Office of the Chief Justice on the declarations of measures restricting court operations due to the third wave of Covid-19 pandemic this Ruling has been delivered online to the last known email address thereby waiving Order 21 [1] of the Civil Procedure Rules.