[2018] KEELC 953 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 953 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff was entitled to the eviction order sought, as the Court of Appeal had already determined the substantive rights in its judgment of 18th December 2014, granting the plaintiff vacant possession of the suit property. There was no opposition to the application, and the court emphasized...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 953 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: David Sironga Ole Tukai; Defendant: Francis Arap Muge; Defendant: Samuel Kiprotich Arap Kirui; Defendant: Johannah Kiprono Arap Mosonik; Defendant: Kapkween Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 253 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Post Judgment Eviction Application
Outcome
Application allowed. Eviction order granted subject to thirty days' notice to defendants.
Judges
DO Ohungo
Legal Topics
Eviction Orders, Vacant Possession, Execution of Decree, Notice to Judgment Debtor
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Orders Vacant Possession Execution of Decree Notice to Judgment Debtor

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Sironga Ole Tukai

Plaintiff

Francis Arap Muge

Defendant

Samuel Kiprotich Arap Kirui

Defendant

Johannah Kiprono Arap Mosonik

Defendant

Kapkween Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Post Judgment Eviction Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an eviction order against the defendants from parcel Narok/Cis Mara/Ololulunga/161 pursuant to the Court of Appeal judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the eviction should be conducted in compliance with statutory requirements and the decree issued.
  3. 3 Whether the defendants should be given notice and an opportunity to vacate voluntarily before forcible eviction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff was entitled to the eviction order sought, as the Court of Appeal had already determined the substantive rights in its judgment of 18th December 2014, granting the plaintiff vacant possession of the suit property. There was no opposition to the application, and the court emphasized that the eviction must be carried out strictly in accordance with the appellate judgment and the law. The court further held that the defendants should be given thirty days' notice to vacate voluntarily, failing which eviction would proceed under the supervision of the police and in compliance with the Land Act and Civil Procedure Rules. The costs of the application,...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Eviction order granted subject to thirty days' notice to defendants.

Orders

  • Defendants to vacate parcel Narok/Cis Mara/Ololulunga/161 within thirty days of service of the orders; in default, eviction to ensue.
  • Eviction order issued to Jeremiah K. Muchendu t/a Icon Auctioneers to evict defendants and all members of Kapkween Farmers Co-operative Society Limited from the suit property.