[2017] KEELC 3096 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 3096 (KLR)

The court found that at the interlocutory stage, it was not possible to conclusively determine whether the disputed parcel of land was Nairobi/Block 63/398 or Nairobi/Block 63/393, as claimed by the respective parties. Given this uncertainty and the fact that both parties were asserting rights over the same parcel...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 3096 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Francis Eric Wasuna; Plaintiff: Ruth Wasuna; Defendant: Eunice Njeri Njeru; Defendant: Wilson Muteru; Defendant: County Government of Nairobi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 783 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
MM Gitumbi
Legal Topics
Land Ownership Dispute, Vacant Possession, Interlocutory Injunctions
Source Language
en
Land and Property Land Ownership Dispute Vacant Possession Interlocutory 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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francis Eric Wasuna

Plaintiff

Ruth Wasuna

Plaintiff

Eunice Njeri Njeru

Defendant

Wilson Muteru

Defendant

County Government of Nairobi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to interlocutory relief over parcel Nairobi/Block 63/398 pending trial.
  2. 2 Whether the disputed parcel is Nairobi/Block 63/398 or Nairobi/Block 63/393.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that at the interlocutory stage, it was not possible to conclusively determine whether the disputed parcel of land was Nairobi/Block 63/398 or Nairobi/Block 63/393, as claimed by the respective parties. Given this uncertainty and the fact that both parties were asserting rights over the same parcel on the ground, the court determined that the appropriate course was to preserve the status quo by ordering that the suit property remain in vacant possession pending the hearing and determination of the suit. The plaintiffs' application for interlocutory relief was dismissed, and costs were ordered to be in the cause. The matter was directed to proceed to pre-trial conference...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Notice of Motion dated 16/6/2014 is dismissed.
  • The suit property shall remain in vacant possession pending the hearing and determination of the suit.