[2018] KEELC 3509 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3509 (KLR)

The court found that Henry is the registered proprietor of Naivasha/Oljorai Phase II/644, and under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act, his title deed is conclusive evidence of ownership until successfully challenged. Jephithar failed to provide evidence supporting his claim that Henry's plot was derived from...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3509 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Henry Mungai Kimani; Defendant: Jephither Keanche Migosi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 395 & 384 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Injunction Application / Ruling on Consolidated Interlocutory Injunction Applications
Outcome
Henry's application for interlocutory injunction granted; Jephithar's application dismissed with costs.
Judges
DO Ohungo
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Land Title Disputes, Registration of Land, Prima Facie Case
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctive Relief Land Title Disputes Registration of Land Prima Facie Case

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Henry Mungai Kimani

Plaintiff

Jephither Keanche Migosi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Injunction Application / Ruling on Consolidated Interlocutory Injunction Applications

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case with a probability of success for grant of interlocutory injunction.
  2. 2 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy in lieu of an injunction.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience tilts in favour of granting or refusing the injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Henry is the registered proprietor of Naivasha/Oljorai Phase II/644, and under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act, his title deed is conclusive evidence of ownership until successfully challenged. Jephithar failed to provide evidence supporting his claim that Henry's plot was derived from his own or that the title was fraudulently acquired. The court was satisfied that Henry had established a prima facie case and that damages would not be an adequate remedy for trespass or damage to the property. Conversely, Jephithar did not establish a prima facie case. Accordingly, the court dismissed Jephithar's application and granted Henry's application for an interlocutory...

Court Disposition

Henry's application for interlocutory injunction granted; Jephithar's application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Jephithar’s Notice of Motion dated 6th October 2017 is dismissed with costs to Henry.
  • An injunction is granted restraining Jephithar by himself, his agents, servants or representatives from selling, transferring, leasing, building upon, subdividing, charging, dealing or interfering in any other manner with the parcel of land known as title number Naivasha/Oljorai Phase II/644 pending the hearing and...