[2022] KEHC 10923 (KLR)

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2022] KEHC 10923 (KLR)
Parties: Plaintiff: FKB; Respondent: JBR
Court: High Court
Court Station: High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction: Kenya
Case Number: Civil Case 71 of 2015
Procedural Posture: Civil Case / Interlocutory Application for Interim Orders Pending Hearing of the Main Suit
Outcome: Application dismissed; interim orders sought declined.
Judges: TW Cherere
Legal Topics: Matrimonial Property Disputes, Co Ownership of Land, Interlocutory Injunctions, Rental Income Management
Source Language: en

Family and Children Land and Property Matrimonial Property Disputes Co Ownership of Land Interlocutory Injunctions Rental Income Management

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 5 Party arguments 2

Parties

FKB

Plaintiff

JBR

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Interlocutory Application for Interim Orders Pending Hearing of the Main Suit

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicant and her children are co-owners of the suit properties to the exclusion of the respondent.
2 Whether the respondent should be compelled to render accounts of rent collected from the suit properties.
3 Whether interim orders restraining the respondent from dealing with the properties and directing deposit of rent in a joint account should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the issues raised by the applicant regarding ownership and entitlement to rental proceeds from the suit properties are substantive and cannot be resolved through interlocutory applications. The court emphasized that repeated interim applications have delayed the main suit and increased costs, contrary to the overriding objective of expeditious and affordable justice. The court declined to grant the interim orders sought, reiterating that the dispute should be determined at a plenary hearing where all evidence can be properly considered.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; interim orders sought declined.

Orders

The application dated 21.03.2022 is dismissed.
The parties are directed to take proactive steps to set down the main suit for hearing.

Full Case Text

Judgment text and source record

27 paragraphs

FKB v JBR (Civil Case 71 of 2015) [2022] KEHC 10923 (KLR) (23 June 2022) (Judgment)

Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 10923 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Meru

Civil Case 71 of 2015

TW Cherere, J

June 23, 2022

Between

FKB

Plaintiff

and

JBR

Respondent

Judgment

1. The subject matter in this suit resolves around the flowing properties:a.LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxxb.LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx

2. FKB (Plaintiff/Applicant) took out an Originating Summons dated 17th August, 2015 under Section 14 (a) of the Matrimonial Property Act, 2013and Order 37 (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking1. Determination of whether LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx and LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx are wholly owned by the Applicant and the children of the marriage to the exclusion of the Respondent2. An order to restrain the Respondent from disposing off, alienating, charging, collecting rent from the two properties3. An order that rents collected from the two properties be deposited in the children’s’ account

3. Simultaneously with the OS, Applicant on 18. 08. 2015 filed a notice of motion dated 17. 08. 2015 seeking to restrain Respondent from collecting rent from the two properties and for an order that the rents be deposited in the children’s account.

4. Respondent raised a P.O to the application and the court by a ruling dated 01. 02. 2018 declined the application and directed that the issues be determined at the hearing of the suits on merit.

5. The Respondent avers that two other similar applications were filed by the Applicant but the outcome of those other applications has not been disclosed.

6. In the current application dated 21. 03. 2022, Applicant seeks orders that:1. Pending the hearing and determination of this suit, Respondent do render accounts of proceeds of monthly rent collected from LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx and LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx since the commencement of the suit2. Pending the hearing and determination of this suit, Respondent do render the names of each tenant, monthly rent paid by each tenant on properties known as LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx and LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx3. Pending the hearing and determination of this suit, the monthly rents collected from properties known as LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx and LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx be deposited in an interest earning account of both advocates4. Pending the hearing and determination of this suit, be restrained from developing and or constructing any further developments on properties known as LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx and LR. Ntima/igoki/xxxx5. Costs be provided for

7. The summons is supported by an affidavit sworn by the Applicant on 21. 03. 2022 in which she avers mainly that she and her children who are co-owners of the suit properties with the Respondent require proceeds of the rents for their upkeep.

8. Respondent opposes the application by his replying affidavit sworn on 13. 04. 2022. He avers that he has been maintaining and paying school fees for the Applicant’s 3 children two of whom are now working and continues to pay fees for one who is still in school. He further avers that Applicant is salaried and that he has no rent kept anywhere to account for since the balance is used for his upkeep and that of his family.

Analysis and determination 9. I have considered the application in the light of the court record, the affidavits and submissions filed on behalf of both parties. I notice that since the filing of this suit in 2019, the parties have not taken steps to prosecute the suit on merit so that the issues in dispute can be conclusively determined.

10. The numerous applications in this matter not only confuse issues but also delays its conclusion thereby increasing costs for the parties and is therefore inconsistent with the overriding objective of the court to facilitate the just, expeditious, proportionate and affordable resolution of cases.

11. I therefore find as did Gikonyo J in his ruling dated 01. 02. 2018 that the issues between the parties herein are better dealt with in plenary trial and not in piecemeal as has been the case.

12. From the foregoing, I decline to grant the orders sought and reiterate the order by Otieno J issued on 11. 06. 2021 that the parties need to take proactive steps to progress the matter for hearing.

DATED AT MERU THIS 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2022WAMAE. T. W. CHEREREJUDGEAppearancesCourt Assistant - Morris KinotiFor Applicant - Mr.Wamwayi for Wamwayi & Co. AdvocatesFor Respondent - Mr. Carlpeters for Carlpeters Mbaabu & Co. Advocates

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.