[2014] KEELC 293 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs, as officials of Ndelema Self Help Group, had established that the group lawfully acquired LR NO 8994/11 (Kaptich Farm) for its members and that the defendants, being former members who did not contribute to the purchase, had no legal right to interfere with the group or its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEELC 293 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Charles Khisa Ngengwe; Plaintiff: Geoffrey Wekesa; Plaintiff: Geoffrey Wanjala; Defendant: Simon Wachie; Defendant: Calistus Nyongesa; Defendant: Gladys Wafula; Defendant: Moses Wafula; Defendant: Bernard Munialo; Defendant: Janet Mukopi; Defendant: Tom Wanambisi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Land Case 122 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Land Case / Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiffs' claim allowed; permanent injunction granted against defendants.
- Judges
- EO Obaga
- Legal Topics
- Group Land Ownership, Injunctive Relief, Land Disputes, Self Help Groups
- 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
Charles Khisa Ngengwe
Plaintiff
Geoffrey Wekesa
Plaintiff
Geoffrey Wanjala
Plaintiff
Simon Wachie
Defendant
Calistus Nyongesa
Defendant
Gladys Wafula
Defendant
Moses Wafula
Defendant
Bernard Munialo
Defendant
Janet Mukopi
Defendant
Tom Wanambisi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants, as former members, have any right to interfere with the affairs and land of Ndelema Self Help Group.
- 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the group and its land.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs, as officials of Ndelema Self Help Group, had established that the group lawfully acquired LR NO 8994/11 (Kaptich Farm) for its members and that the defendants, being former members who did not contribute to the purchase, had no legal right to interfere with the group or its property. The defendants failed to enter appearance or file a defence, and the plaintiffs' evidence was unchallenged. The court held that the plaintiffs had proved their case on a balance of probabilities and were entitled to the reliefs sought, specifically a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the group and its land.
Court Disposition
Plaintiffs' claim allowed; permanent injunction granted against defendants.
Orders
- A permanent injunction is issued restraining the defendants from interfering with the running of Ndelema Self Help Group and its Land Parcel NO. 8994/11 Kaptich Farm.
- The plaintiffs' claim is allowed in terms of prayer (a) to (c) of the plaint.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT KITALE
LAND CASE NO. 122 OF 2013
CHARLES KHISA NGENGWE
GEOFFREY WEKESA
GEOFFREY WANJALA
(Suing as representatives of Ndelema Self Help Group)................PLAINTIFFS
VERSUS
SIMON WACHIE
CALISTUS NYONGESA
GLADYS WAFULA
MOSES WAFULA
BERNARD MUNIALO
JANET MUKOPI
TOM WANAMBISI...........................................................................DEFENDANTS
J U D G E M E N T
INTRODUCTION
1. The Plaintiffs are officials of Ndelema Self Help Group. The group was founded for purposes of purchasing land for its members. The group purchased LR NO 8994/11 commonly known as Kaptich Farm on which it has settled its members.
2. The defendants are all former members of the group. The first, second and third plaintiffs are chairman, secretary and treasurer of the group respectively. The plaintiffs filed a suit against the defendants seeking a permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from interfering with the running of the group and its Land Parcel NO. 8994/11 Kaptich farm. The defendants who were duly served with summons to enter appearance neither entered appearance nor filed defence. The plaintiffs therefore proceeded by way of formal proof.
PLAINTIFFS CASE
3. Charles Khisa Ngengwe the group's chairman testified that the group was formed for purposes of purchasing land for its members. The group purchased LR NO 8994/11 and settled its members. The defendants who are former members invaded the farm and imposed themselves as officials of the group and have since been causing trouble even going to an extent of carrying out criminal activities within the farm such as destroying houses belonging to members. The chairman testified that the defendants never contributed any money towards the purchase of the land and therefore should not interfere with the affairs of the group.
ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE
4. The evidence adduced by the plaintiffs was not controverted. The chairman of the group produced a certificate of registration for the group exhibit 1. He also produced a notice of motion dated 17/6/2014 which contains a petition the officials filed against the Agricultural Finance Corporation exhibit 2. This petition shows details on how the group acquired the property known as LR NO 8994/11 Kaptich Farm. The defendants who are former members of the group should not be allowed to meddle with the affairs of the group including the land which the group bought for its members.
DECISION
5. I find that the plaintiffs have proved their case against the defendants on a balance of probabilities. The plaintiffs claim is allowed in terms of prayer (a) to (c) of the plaint.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kitale on this 30th day of July, 2014.
E. OBAGA
JUDGE
COURT: Judgement delivered in the absence of Plaintiff's advocate who was aware of today's date. Court Clerk – Kassachoon.
E. OBAGA
JUDGE
30/07/2014