[2015] KEHC 2887 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 2887 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established sufficient grounds for urgency, as the 3rd interested party had commenced development on the suit property without being in occupation or user, and there was a real risk of irreparable harm if the property was alienated or interfered with before the main application...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 2887 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: George Kabayo as Legal Representative of the estate of M’Mboroki M'Iitaru; Respondent: District Land Adjudication Officer Tigania East/West; Respondent: Director of Land Adjudication; Interested Party: Nathaniel Maingi Thimangu as legal representative of Abendinego Imaingi Iburi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Constitutional Application 1 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Application / Ruling on Certificate of Urgency
Outcome
Certificate of urgency allowed; application for temporary injunction to be heard inter partes.
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Land Adjudication, Interlocutory Injunctions, Urgent Applications
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Land Adjudication Interlocutory Injunctions Urgent Applications

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Kabayo as Legal Representative of the estate of M’Mboroki M'Iitaru

Applicant

District Land Adjudication Officer Tigania East/West

Respondent

Director of Land Adjudication

Respondent

Nathaniel Maingi Thimangu as legal representative of Abendinego Imaingi Iburi

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Application / Ruling on Certificate of Urgency

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to urgent interlocutory relief to restrain the interested party from developing or interfering with the suit property pending hearing and determination of the main application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if the orders are not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established sufficient grounds for urgency, as the 3rd interested party had commenced development on the suit property without being in occupation or user, and there was a real risk of irreparable harm if the property was alienated or interfered with before the main application could be heard. The court exercised its discretion to allow the certificate of urgency, thereby prioritizing the hearing of the pending application for a temporary injunction and restraining any further dealings with the property until the matter is heard inter partes.

Court Disposition

Certificate of urgency allowed; application for temporary injunction to be heard inter partes.

Orders

  • The certificate of urgency is allowed.
  • The application dated 20th March, 2013 will be heard inter partes on 29/09/2015.