[2020] KEELC 355 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 355 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant is the legal registered owner of the suit land and that a valid judgment and decree requiring the defendants to vacate the land had been issued and served. The defendants failed to comply with the court's orders, did not appeal, and did not seek a stay or set aside the judgment....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 355 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Grace A. Muruki; Plaintiff: Sarah Chiseka Makokha; Respondent: Agneta Aviza; Respondent: Christopher Aura & Others
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 282 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Enforcement Application
Outcome
application granted in part
Judges
NA Matheka
Legal Topics
Eviction Orders, Enforcement of Judgments, Injunctive Relief, Possession of Land
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Orders Enforcement of Judgments Injunctive Relief Possession of Land

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

Grace A. Muruki

Applicant

Sarah Chiseka Makokha

Plaintiff

Agneta Aviza

Respondent

Christopher Aura & Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Enforcement Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to enforcement of the eviction order against the defendants for failure to vacate the suit land as decreed.
  2. 2 Whether the court should order provision of security and disconnection of utilities to facilitate execution of the eviction order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant is the legal registered owner of the suit land and that a valid judgment and decree requiring the defendants to vacate the land had been issued and served. The defendants failed to comply with the court's orders, did not appeal, and did not seek a stay or set aside the judgment. The court emphasized that court orders must be obeyed and that there was no sufficient reason for the defendants' continued occupation. Consequently, the court held that the application for enforcement of the eviction order was merited and granted the operative prayer for provision of security during execution, with costs to the applicant.

Court Disposition

application granted in part

Orders

  • The O.C.S. Butere Police Station, officers under his/her command, the Assistant County Commissioner Butere Sub County and officers under his/her command are ordered to provide the 1st plaintiff/decree holder/applicant, the court bailiff or the applicant’s court broker and auctioneer with adequate security if...
  • The costs of this application are awarded to the applicant.