[2014] KEHC 2449 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 2449 (KLR)

The court accepted the plaintiff's request to withdraw both applications for contempt and inhibition, noting the absence of opposition from the defendants. However, in the interests of justice and to preserve the subject matter of the suit, the court exercised its discretion under Section 63 of the Civil Procedure...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 2449 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Gladys Kiario Muthee; Defendant: John Mbaya Kiriinya; Defendant: Julius Mworia Kiriinya; Defendant: Land Registrar Meru Central; Defendant: Attorney General
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 74 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Interlocutory Ruling on Withdrawal of Applications and Grant of Inhibition Order
Outcome
Applications withdrawn; inhibition order granted; no order as to costs.
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Withdrawal of Applications, Inhibition Orders, Contempt of Court, Interlocutory Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Withdrawal of Applications Inhibition Orders Contempt of Court Interlocutory Orders

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

Gladys Kiario Muthee

Plaintiff

John Mbaya Kiriinya

Defendant

Julius Mworia Kiriinya

Defendant

Land Registrar Meru Central

Defendant

Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Interlocutory Ruling on Withdrawal of Applications and Grant of Inhibition Order

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's two applications for contempt and inhibition should be withdrawn as requested by the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the court should grant an inhibition order despite the withdrawal of the applications.

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the plaintiff's request to withdraw both applications for contempt and inhibition, noting the absence of opposition from the defendants. However, in the interests of justice and to preserve the subject matter of the suit, the court exercised its discretion under Section 63 of the Civil Procedure Act to grant an inhibition order as prayed for in the withdrawn application dated 6th March 2013. This order was made to ensure that the status quo regarding the property in dispute is maintained pending the hearing and determination of the main suit. No order as to costs was made regarding the withdrawn applications.

Court Disposition

Applications withdrawn; inhibition order granted; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's two applications dated 4.3.2014 and 6.3.2014 are marked as withdrawn.
  • No order as to costs on the withdrawn applications.