[2017] KEELC 2119 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 2119 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case that the charge over his land was registered without his knowledge or authority, supported by forensic evidence indicating forgery of his signature. The risk of the 2nd defendant exercising its power of sale posed a real threat of irreparable harm...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 2119 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Chabari Mungania; Respondent: Felix Murithi Kirai; Respondent: Guaranty Trust Bank (Kenya) Ltd
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 51 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition Order
Outcome
Application allowed; inhibition order granted; no order as to costs.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Charge, Injunctive Relief, Land Title Disputes, Forensic Document Examination
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Fraudulent Charge Injunctive Relief Land Title Disputes Forensic Document Examination

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chabari Mungania

Applicant

Felix Murithi Kirai

Respondent

Guaranty Trust Bank (Kenya) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition Order

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an order of inhibition to prevent dealings with land parcel LR. NO. ABOTHUGUCHI/KIIJA/740 pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the charge registered in favour of the 2nd respondent was obtained fraudulently without the applicant's knowledge or authority.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if the inhibition order is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case that the charge over his land was registered without his knowledge or authority, supported by forensic evidence indicating forgery of his signature. The risk of the 2nd defendant exercising its power of sale posed a real threat of irreparable harm to the applicant, namely the loss of his land. As the defendants failed to respond to the application, there was no evidence of prejudice to them if the inhibition order was granted. The court exercised its discretion to preserve the suit property by granting the inhibition order pending the determination of the suit, finding this necessary to prevent injustice and maintain...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; inhibition order granted; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • An order of inhibition is issued, inhibiting any dealings with land parcel LR. NO. ABOTHUGUCHI/KIIJA/740 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
  • No order as to costs.