[2024] KEELC 6251 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 6251 (KLR)

The court found that the matter was at an early stage and that the 4th to 6th defendants had not demonstrated any prejudice that would result from an order preserving the suit land. Given the plaintiffs' averment of imminent sale and the lack of evidence to the contrary, the court determined that it was just and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 6251 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Lilian N Githunguri; Plaintiff: Clare N Githunguri; Defendant: William Langat Samoe; Defendant: Samuel Mbugua Kariuki; Defendant: Fredrick Kimemia Kimani; Defendant: Gulf African Bank Limited; Defendant: Philips International Auctioneers; Defendant: Purple Royal Auctioneers; Defendant: Chief Land Registrar
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E330 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction and Substituted Service
Outcome
Interim orders granted; status quo to be maintained; substituted service allowed.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Status Quo Orders, Substituted Service, Preservation of Property
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Interim Injunctions Status Quo Orders Substituted Service Preservation of Property

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

Lilian N Githunguri

Plaintiff

Clare N Githunguri

Plaintiff

William Langat Samoe

Defendant

Samuel Mbugua Kariuki

Defendant

Fredrick Kimemia Kimani

Defendant

Gulf African Bank Limited

Defendant

Philips International Auctioneers

Defendant

Purple Royal Auctioneers

Defendant

Chief Land Registrar

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction and Substituted Service

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to interim orders preserving the suit land pending determination of the substantive application.
  2. 2 Whether substituted service upon the 1st to 3rd defendants should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the matter was at an early stage and that the 4th to 6th defendants had not demonstrated any prejudice that would result from an order preserving the suit land. Given the plaintiffs' averment of imminent sale and the lack of evidence to the contrary, the court determined that it was just and equitable to maintain the status quo in terms of both possession and registration of the suit land. The court also found merit in the plaintiffs' request for substituted service on the 1st to 3rd defendants, as personal service had not been effected. Accordingly, interim orders preserving the suit land and allowing substituted service were granted.

Court Disposition

Interim orders granted; status quo to be maintained; substituted service allowed.

Orders

  • An order of maintenance of status quo is granted in terms of ground possession and registration status; the suit land shall not be sold pending determination of the substantive application.
  • Service of all suit papers upon the 1st to 3rd defendants is to be effected by substituted service via the Daily Nation within 7 days.