[2017] KEELC 2655 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 2655 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case based on the title deed showing easement rights and evidence of destruction by the defendants. The court determined that damages would not be an adequate remedy for the plaintiff if the injunction was not granted. Given the unopposed nature of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 2655 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Godfrey Kithinji (Chairman), Frankline Kinoti Rukaria (Secretary), Carol Mwirigi (Treasurer) suing for and on behalf of P.C.E.A. Gangara Church – Ngirine Parish; Defendant: Gilbert Kirimi Kanampiu; Defendant: Benson Kimathi Kiara; Defendant: John Kithinji
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 221 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
application allowed in part
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Easement Rights, Injunctive Relief, Prima Facie Case, Irreparable Harm
Source Language
en
Land and Property Easement Rights Injunctive Relief Prima Facie Case Irreparable Harm

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

Godfrey Kithinji (Chairman), Frankline Kinoti Rukaria (Secretary), Carol Mwirigi (Treasurer) suing for and on behalf of P.C.E.A. Gangara Church – Ngirine Parish

Plaintiff

Gilbert Kirimi Kanampiu

Defendant

Benson Kimathi Kiara

Defendant

John Kithinji

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with parcel No. ABOGETA/U-KITHANGARI/2482 pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case with a probability of success.
  3. 3 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the plaintiff if the injunction is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case based on the title deed showing easement rights and evidence of destruction by the defendants. The court determined that damages would not be an adequate remedy for the plaintiff if the injunction was not granted. Given the unopposed nature of the application and the supporting evidence, the court exercised its discretion to grant an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the suit property for a period of eight months.

Court Disposition

application allowed in part

Orders

  • An injunction is granted restraining the defendants, their agents or assignees from entering, remaining or in any other way interfering with parcel No. ABOGETA/U-KITHANGARI/2482 for a period of eight months.
  • Costs of the application to be provided.