[2018] KEELC 2341 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 2341 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had proved his case on a balance of probabilities, primarily relying on the unchallenged surveyor's report dated 9/3/2018, which established that the defendant's parcel had encroached on the plaintiff's land. The absence of any defence or contrary evidence from the defendant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 2341 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Charles Laalia M’Linkaibua; Defendant: Joseph Njilithia M’Akwalu
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 172 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Dispute / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's case proved; mandatory injunction granted; boundary to be fixed as per surveyor's report; costs awarded to plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Land Encroachment, Injunctions
Source Language
en
Land and Property Boundary Disputes Land Encroachment Injunctions

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Laalia M’Linkaibua

Plaintiff

Joseph Njilithia M’Akwalu

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Dispute / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant encroached on the plaintiff's land parcel Tigania/Kitharene/1301.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a mandatory injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the boundary.
  3. 3 Whether the boundary should be fixed as per the surveyor's report.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had proved his case on a balance of probabilities, primarily relying on the unchallenged surveyor's report dated 9/3/2018, which established that the defendant's parcel had encroached on the plaintiff's land. The absence of any defence or contrary evidence from the defendant further strengthened the plaintiff's case. The court concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to a mandatory injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the boundary and ordered the sub county surveyor to fix the actual boundary as per the report. The plaintiff was directed to meet the surveyor's costs, while the defendant was condemned to pay the costs of the suit.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's case proved; mandatory injunction granted; boundary to be fixed as per surveyor's report; costs awarded to plaintiff.

Orders

  • A mandatory injunction restraining the defendant from destroying the common boundary between land parcels Tigania/Kitharene/1301 and 1323 is issued.
  • The sub county surveyor Meru North is ordered to fix the actual boundary between the two parcels as per the report dated 9/3/2018.