[2021] KEELC 2829 (KLR)

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2021] KEELC 2829 (KLR)
Parties: Applicant: Faith Karambu; Applicant: James Murian M’Imukuu; Applicant: Nancy Ikolomi Mithaka; Applicant: George Mwingirwa M’Imukuu; Applicant: Edward Gikundi M’Imukuu; Applicant: Jane Kananu M’Imukuu; Applicant: Jotham Mwenda M’Imukuo; Respondent: Eunice Wambui Mukiri; Respondent: James Mwenda; Respondent: Martha Mukoruru Mukaria; Respondent: Muriungi Anjelio; Respondent: Mutirithia Kiraithe; Respondent: Moses Kithinji Lithara; Respondent: Florence Muthoni Kithinji; Respondent: Edward Ndeke Kiriungi; Respondent: Christine Karwitha Mbaabu; Respondent: Stanley Mwenda Joshua; Respondent: Maritha Inko M’Ambutu; Respondent: Geoffrey Kithinji M’Twaruchiu; Respondent: Kenneth Munene; Respondent: Naman Mutuma Mugaa; Respondent: Nicholas Mutethia; Respondent: Gedion Kaindio Maingi; Respondent: Meru County Government; Respondent: The Land Registrar Meru North; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General
Court: Environment and Land Court
Court Station: Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Jurisdiction: Kenya
Case Number: Environment & Land Case E020 of 2021
Procedural Posture: Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Inhibition
Outcome: interim inhibition order granted; application set for interpartes hearing
Legal Topics: Injunctions, Land Title Disputes, Proprietary Rights, Registration of Land, Interlocutory Orders
Source Language: en

Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctions Land Title Disputes Proprietary Rights Registration of Land Interlocutory Orders

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

Parties

Faith Karambu

Applicant

James Murian M’Imukuu

Applicant

Nancy Ikolomi Mithaka

Applicant

George Mwingirwa M’Imukuu

Applicant

Edward Gikundi M’Imukuu

Applicant

Jane Kananu M’Imukuu

Applicant

Jotham Mwenda M’Imukuo

Applicant

Eunice Wambui Mukiri

Respondent

James Mwenda

Respondent

Martha Mukoruru Mukaria

Respondent

Muriungi Anjelio

Respondent

Mutirithia Kiraithe

Respondent

Moses Kithinji Lithara

Respondent

Florence Muthoni Kithinji

Respondent

Edward Ndeke Kiriungi

Respondent

Christine Karwitha Mbaabu

Respondent

Stanley Mwenda Joshua

Respondent

Maritha Inko M’Ambutu

Respondent

Geoffrey Kithinji M’Twaruchiu

Respondent

Kenneth Munene

Respondent

Naman Mutuma Mugaa

Respondent

Nicholas Mutethia

Respondent

Gedion Kaindio Maingi

Respondent

Meru County Government

Respondent

The Land Registrar Meru North

Respondent

The Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Inhibition

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicants have established a prima facie case for the grant of inhibition orders over the suit properties.
2 Whether the applicants are entitled to interlocutory relief to preserve the suit properties pending hearing and determination of the main suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had demonstrated a prima facie case for the grant of inhibition orders over the suit properties. The applicants provided evidence that the suit parcels were originally owned by their deceased father and had allegedly been transferred to the respondents without proper authority or consent. The court considered the risk of irreparable loss to the applicants if the properties were further dealt with before the main suit was heard. Given the urgency and the need to preserve the subject matter, the court exercised its discretion to grant inhibition orders as sought in prayer 2 of the application, pending interpartes hearing. The court did not address the...

Court Disposition

interim inhibition order granted; application set for interpartes hearing

Orders

Prayer 2 for inhibition is granted, restraining any dealings with the suit properties pending hearing and determination of the application and main suit.
The application will be heard interpartes by an ELC Judge at Meru on 21st September, 2021.

Full Case Text

Judgment text and source record

92 paragraphs

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA

MERU ELC SUIT NO. E020 OF 2021

FAITH KARAMBU ....................................................1ST PLAINTIFF /APPLICANT

JAMES MURIAN M’IMUKUU...................................2ND PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

NANCY IKOLOMI MITHAKA.................................3RD PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

GEORGE MWINGIRWA M’IMUKUU....................4TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

EDWARD GIKUNDI M’IMUKUU...........................5TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

JANE KANANU M’IMUKUU...................................6TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

JOTHAM MWENDA M’IMUKUO..........................7TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

VERSUS

EUNICE WAMBUI MUKIRI...............................1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

JAMES MWENDA................................................2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

MARTHA MUKORURU MUKARIA.................3RD DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

MURIUNGI ANJELIO.........................................4TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

MUTIRITHIA KIRAITHE.................................5TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

MOSES KITHINJI LITHARA............................6TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

FLORENCE MUTHONI KITHINJI..................7TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

EDWARD NDEKE KIRIUNGI..........................8TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

CHRISTINE KARWITHA MBAABU...............9TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

STANLEY MWENDA JOSHUA.......................10TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

MARITHA INKO M’AMBUTU.......................11TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

GEOFFREY KITHINJI M’TWARUCHIU......12TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

KENNETH MUNENE........................................13TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

NAMAN MUTUMA MUGAA...........................14TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

NICHOLAS MUTETHIA..................................15TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

GEDION KAINDIO MAINGI.........................16TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

MERU COUNTY GOVERNMENT................17TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

THE LAND REGISTRAR MERU NORTH.-18TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL............19TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

RULING

1. This application states that it has been brought to court under Order 40 Rule 1, 2 and 3, Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, Section 68, 69 and 70 of the Land Registration Act 2012, and sections 3A and 63 (e) of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 21 and any other enabling provisions of the law.

2. The application seeks the following orders:-

1. That this application be certified urgent and service thereof be dispensed with in the first instance.

2. That this honourable court be pleased to issue conservatory orders in the nature of an inhibition against the respondents by themselves, their agents, servants, employees, transferees, family members, purchasers or anyone acting on their behest restraining them from any dealings with the register of the titles to land parcels Nos.

Thau/Mumui/230,

Thau/Mumui/321

Thau/Mumui/398

Thau/Mumui/409

Thau/Mumui/Thau/Mumui/411

Thau/Mumui/412

Thau/Mumui/475

Thau/Mumui/476

Thau/Mumui/478

Thau/Mumui/479

Thau/Mumuiu/480

Thau/Mumui/504

Thau/Mumui/694

Thau/Mumui/695

Thau/Mumui/696

Thau/Mumui/697 and

Thau/Mumui/698 pending the hearing and determination of the application herein and the main suit.

3. That this honouable court be pleased to issue injunctive orders restraining the Respondents by themselves, their agents, servants, employees, transferees, family members, purchasers and/or anyone acting on their behest from entering, trespassing, cultivating, alienating, constructing, selling and/or interfering with the quite user and occupation of the applicants or otherwise dealing in any way with the applicants’ parcels of land known as:

Thau/Mumui/230,

Thau/Mumui/321

Thau/Mumui/398

Thau/Mumui/409

Thau/Mumui/Thau/Mumui/411

Thau/Mumui/412

Thau/Mumui/475

Thau/Mumui/476

Thau/Mumui/478

Thau/Mumui/479

Thau/Mumuiu/480

Thau/Mumui/504

Thau/Mumui/694

Thau/Mumui/695

Thau/Mumui/696

Thau/Mumui/697 and

Thau/Mumui/698 pending the hearing and determination of this application and the main suit herein.

4. Costs of this application be provided for.

3. This application is supported by the affidavit of Faith Karambu, the 1st defendant and has the following grounds:

a) The 1st Applicant is the actual bona fide and legal owner of the parcels of land known as Thau/Mumui/230, Thau/Mumui/321 and Thau/Mumui/398 which land has been illegally and unprocedurally registered in the names of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents.

b) The 2nd Applicant is the actual bona fide and legal owner of the parcels of land known as Thau/Mumui/409, Thau/Mumui/Thau/Mumui/411 and Thau/Mumui/412 which land has been illegally and unprocedurally registered in the names of the 4th, 5th and 6th respondents.

c) The 3rd Applicant is the actual bona fide and legal owner of the parcels of land known as Thau/Mumui/475, Thau/Mumui/476 and Thau/Mumui/478 which land has been illegally and unprocedurally registered in the names of the 7th, 8th and 9th respondents.

d) The 4th Applicant is the actual bona fide and legal owner of the parcels of land known as Thau/Mumui/479 and Thau/Mumui/480 which land has been illegally and unprocedurally registered in the names of the 10th and 11th respondents.

e) The 5th Applicant is the actual bona fide and legal owner of the parcels of land known as Thau/Mumui/504 and Thau/Mumui/694, which land has been illegally and unprocedurally registered in the names of the 12th and 13th respondents.

f) The 6th applicant is the actual bona fide and legal owner of the parcels of land known as Thau/Mumui/695 and Thau/Mumui/696 which land has been illegally and unprocedurally registered in the name of the 14th and 15th respondents.

g) The 7th applicant is the actual bona fide and legal owner of the parcels of land known as Thau/Mumui/697 and Thau/Mumuui/698 which land has been illegally and unprocedurally registered in the names of the 16th and 17th respondents.

h) That the respondents have no title, interest, nexus or claim whatsoever relating to the aforementioned parcels of land all of which legally belong to the applicants herein by virtue of the fact that the said parcels all belonged to the applicants’ deceased father, one M’Imukuu Mwenda Ngambe as one whole parcel of land measuring approximately 9. 24 Ha which the applicant’s deceased father acquired back in 1979 through gathering.

i) That the respondents have conspired to have the said parcel of land illegally and secretly transferred into their respective names without consent, color or right and/or authority.

j) That the respondents have illegally acquired title deeds to the disputed parcels of land in a bid to deprive the applicants of their respective proprietary rights.

k) That unless inhibition and injunctive orders are issued, the applicants and their families will suffer irreparable loss and damage.

4. At the ex-parte stage M/s Mwiti told the court that at that stage she only sought prayer No. 2 for inhibition after which she would serve the application upon the respondents for interpartes hearing.

5. I issue the following orders.

a) Prayer 2 for inhibition is granted.

b)The application will be heard interpartes by an ELC Judge at Meru on 21st September, 2021.

Written and delivered in open Court at Chuka this 21st day of June, 2021 in the presence of:

CA: Ndegwa

M/s Mwiti for the applicants

P. M. NJOROGE,

JUDGE.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.