[2014] KEHC 6037 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for the grant of a mandatory injunction, as the defendant landlord failed to respond or provide any evidence justifying the locking of the premises. The only material before the court was the plaintiff's uncontested evidence that rent had been...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 6037 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Benard Onkoba t/a Betico Auctioneers; Defendant: Joy Beauty Wear Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 100 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Application for Mandatory Injunction
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Landlord Tenant Disputes, Mandatory Injunctions, Possession of Premises
- 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
Benard Onkoba t/a Betico Auctioneers
Plaintiff
Joy Beauty Wear Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Application for Mandatory Injunction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant landlord was justified in locking up the plaintiff's rented premises.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a mandatory injunction compelling the defendant to open the premises.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for the grant of a mandatory injunction, as the defendant landlord failed to respond or provide any evidence justifying the locking of the premises. The only material before the court was the plaintiff's uncontested evidence that rent had been paid and the premises were locked without cause. In the absence of any justification from the defendant, the court granted the plaintiff the benefit of doubt and issued injunctive orders compelling the defendant to open the premises and allow the plaintiff access, conditional upon continued payment of rent as agreed.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The defendant is directed to open up the premises and allow the plaintiff access to the subject property pending hearing and determination of the suit.
- The orders remain in force as long as the plaintiff continues to pay rent of Kshs. 30,000 on or before the 5th day of every subsequent month.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT OF KENYA
E&L 100 OF 2014
BENARD ONKOBA T/A
BETICO AUCTIONEERS........................................................................... PLAINTIFFS
VS
JOY BEAUTY WEAR L.T.D........................................................................DEFENDANT
(Application seeking orders to re-open rented premises; no response from landlord on the application; no evidence upon which the locking up of the premises may be justified; application allowed)
RULING
In this suit, the plaintiff has contended that the defendant has unfairly locked up his premises. The defendant is the landlord of the plaintiff. Simultaneously with the suit, the plaintiff filed an application for mandatory injunction to compel the defendant to open up the premises.
When the matter first came before me on 27 March 2014, I only certified the application as urgent and did not give any interim orders. I directed that the application be served and be heard on on 31 March 2014. The application was duly served but on the appointed date only the plaintiff showed up.
I have perused the pleadings and the application. It is the case of the plaintiff that he has dutifully been paying rent yet the defendant locked up the premises. The defendant has not responded and the only material before me is that of the plaintiff. I therefore have no evidence in which the defendant's action may be justified.
I will grant the plaintiff the benefit of doubt and issue injunctive orders directing the defendant to open up the premises and allow the plaintiff access to the subject property pending hearing and determination of this suit. The orders will remain in force for as long as the plaintiff continues to pay the rent of Kshs. 30,000/= on or before the 5th day of every subsequent month, which rent, Mr. Momanyi stated from the bar, is what the plaintiff pays per month.
It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2014
JUSTICE MUNYAO SILA
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT ELDORET
Delivered in the presence of:
Mr. E.M. Momanyi for plaintiff/applicant
N/A for defendant