[2014] KEHC 3635 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had proved his case on a balance of probabilities. The plaintiff produced a registered power of attorney, a title deed, and an official search confirming his ownership of the suit property. There was no evidence of any encumbrance or caution on the title. The defendant, despite...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 3635 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Blackslain Inahi Akinala; Defendant: Mwangi Thiga Mukuha
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 165 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Land Case / Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's suit allowed. Eviction and permanent injunction granted.
- Judges
- EO Obaga
- Legal Topics
- Eviction, Ownership Dispute, Title Registration
- 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
Blackslain Inahi Akinala
Plaintiff
Mwangi Thiga Mukuha
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is the lawful owner of LR. NO. Sinyerere/Sitatunga Block 1/Mukuyu/512.
- 2 Whether the defendant should be evicted from the suit property.
- 3 Whether a permanent injunction should issue restraining the defendant from interfering with the suit property.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had proved his case on a balance of probabilities. The plaintiff produced a registered power of attorney, a title deed, and an official search confirming his ownership of the suit property. There was no evidence of any encumbrance or caution on the title. The defendant, despite being served, failed to enter appearance or file a defence, and did not contest the plaintiff's evidence. The court held that the plaintiff, as the registered owner, was entitled to exclusive possession of the land and that the continued occupation by the defendant was unlawful. Consequently, the court granted an eviction order and a permanent injunction restraining the defendant...
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's suit allowed. Eviction and permanent injunction granted.
Orders
- The defendant and/or his agents be evicted from LR. NO. Sinyerere/Sitatunga Block 1/Mukuyu/512.
- A permanent injunction is issued restraining the defendant or his agents from interfering with the suit land.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN TH ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KITALE
LAND CASE NO. 165 OF 2013
BLACKSLAND INAHI AKINALA ….............................. PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MWANGI THIGA MUKUHA …...................................... DEFENDANT
J U D G E M E N T
INTRODUCTION
The Plaintiff brought a suit against the defendant seeking eviction orders against the defendant from LR. NO. Sinyerere/Sitatunga Block 1/Mukuyu/512 as well as a permanent injunction restraining the defendant and or his agents from interfering with the said property.
The defendant who was duly served with summons to enter appearance neither entered appearance nor filed a defence. The hearing therefore proceeded by way of formal proof.
PLAINTIFF'S CASE
The plaintiff who is based at Botswana gave his father Samson Akinala Ababu power of attorney to do anything appertaining to the suit property. The plaintiff's father testified that the plaintiff bought the suit land from the defendant in the year 2010. He produced a power of attorney duly registered at the Kitale Lands Office (exhibit 1). He also produced a copy of title deed as well as a search exhibit 2 and 3 respectively.
The plaintiff's father testified that since his son bought the suit land, he has never taken possession or utilised it in any way as the defendant and his family have refused to move from the suit land.
ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE
The Plaintiff's evidence remains uncontroverted. The documents produced by the plaintiff i.e copy of title deed as well as search show that the plaintiff is the registered owner of the suit property. There is no caution lodged against the title to the suit property. It is therefore difficult to understand why the defendant is refusing to move out of the suit land which he sold to the plaintiff.
DECISION
I find that the plaintiff has proved his case on a balance of probabilities. An order is hereby issued that the defendant and or his agents be evicted from the suit land. A permanent injunction is hereby given restraining the defendant or his agents from in any way interfering with the suit land. The plaintiff shall have costs of this suit.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kitale on this 10th day of July, 2014.
E. OBAGA
JUDGE
In the presence of M/S Arunga for Plaintiff.
Court Clerk – Kassachoon.
E. OBAGA
JUDGE
10/7/2014