[2014] KEHC 231 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 231 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the preservation of the suit land, L. R. No. NTIMA/IGOKI/8818, pending the hearing and determination of the suit. The plaintiffs established that the land is family property, that they have developed it, and that the first defendant holds it...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 231 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: George Mwiti Itwaruchiu; Plaintiff: Silas Muthee M'Turuchiu; Plaintiff: Gerald Murithi M'Ituruchiu; Defendant: Zipporah Mwari M'Twaruchiu; Defendant: Catherine Karwirwa; Defendant: Margaret Karamana; Defendant: Anna Kathoni; Defendant: Joseph Bundi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 169 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition Order
Outcome
interlocutory orders granted in favour of the plaintiffs
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Inhibition Orders, Family Land Disputes, Trusteeship, Land Preservation
Source Language
en
Land and Property Inhibition Orders Family Land Disputes Trusteeship Land Preservation

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

George Mwiti Itwaruchiu

Plaintiff

Silas Muthee M'Turuchiu

Plaintiff

Gerald Murithi M'Ituruchiu

Plaintiff

Zipporah Mwari M'Twaruchiu

Defendant

Catherine Karwirwa

Defendant

Margaret Karamana

Defendant

Anna Kathoni

Defendant

Joseph Bundi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition Order

  1. 1 Whether an order of inhibition should be issued to restrict dealings with L. R. No. NTIMA/IGOKI/8818 pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs have established sufficient grounds for preservation of the suit land.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the preservation of the suit land, L. R. No. NTIMA/IGOKI/8818, pending the hearing and determination of the suit. The plaintiffs established that the land is family property, that they have developed it, and that the first defendant holds it in trust for the family. The risk of the defendants selling the land and removing the caution registered against it would cause irreparable loss and prejudice to the plaintiffs. The respondents, despite being aware of the hearing date, failed to appear or contest the application. In the circumstances, the court confirmed the orders of inhibition as sought in prayers 3 and 4 of...

Court Disposition

interlocutory orders granted in favour of the plaintiffs

Orders

  • An order of inhibition is issued and registered against L. R. No. NTIMA/IGOKI/8818 to restrict any kind of dealings and preserve the same pending hearing and determination of the suit.
  • The order is to be served upon the District Land Registrar Meru for registration and compliance.