[2007] KEHC 548 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for the grant of an injunction. The court reasoned that once title has been issued and records made by the Ministry of Land, any alteration or cancellation of such title must be done by the court or the Registrar of Land, not unilaterally by the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] KEHC 548 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Henry Nyabuto Nyamdaki; Respondent: Kenyuco Housing Co-operative Society Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 1183 of 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- injunction granted with costs to the applicant
- Legal Topics
- Injunctions, Land Subdivision Disputes, Title Registration, Irreparable Harm
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Henry Nyabuto Nyamdaki
Applicant
Kenyuco Housing Co-operative Society Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with the suit property pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the respondent's actions in re-surveying and sub-dividing the land were lawful given the existing title and subdivision.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for the grant of an injunction. The court reasoned that once title has been issued and records made by the Ministry of Land, any alteration or cancellation of such title must be done by the court or the Registrar of Land, not unilaterally by the respondent. The respondent had not demonstrated that they had obtained the necessary authority to alter the applicant's title or subdivision. The court further held that the applicant would suffer irreparable loss if the respondent proceeded with the new subdivision, as it would undermine the applicant's proprietary rights and the finality of the title already issued. Due...
Court Disposition
injunction granted with costs to the applicant
Orders
- An injunction is hereby issued restraining the respondent from interfering with the suit property pending determination of the suit.
- Costs of the application are awarded to the applicant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
Civil Case 1183 OF 2005
HENRY NYABUTO NYAMDAKI …………….…………… APPLICANT
VERSUS
KENYUCO HOUSEING CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIEITY LTD ………..………...............…… RESPONDENT
RULING
I: APPLICATION DATED 20. 11. 06 SEEKING INJUNCTION ORDERS RESTRAINING DEFENDANT FROM INTERFERING WITH SUIT PROPERTY.
1. Back ground of application
1. The defendants are a land buying company under the cooperative society. The plaintiff brought and sub-divided parcel of land from one of their members being Kajiado/Kaputiei-North 3794 that was about 0. 10 ha or 100 by 100 feet in size.
2. New officials were elected and on going to the ground discovered most beacons were not there. They commenced a new survey for the area of 0. 07 ha per member or 80 by 60 feet in size.
3. The plaintiff objected to this stating suit division was finalized and the title papers were in effect out already.
4. The defendants regardless proceeded to sub-divide through their surveyors. They claimed that the plaintiffs had fraudulently acquired his own surveyor and obtained a bigger portion.
5. The plaintiff filed this suit in 2006 and prayed that permanent injunction do issue for the plaintiff against the defendant to restrain them from actually conducting the surveyor afresh.
II: Application 20. 11. 2007 Procedure
6. On the day the case was called out the advocate for defendant No.1 stated he was before the criminal bench conducting a murder trial before that court.
7. The parties agreed by consent to hear this application from 4 October 2007 to 16 October 2007 on that said day of 16 October 2007 the advocate for defendant failed to attend court. The rules permits this court to proceed on under order IXb r 3(a) Civil Procedure Rules and in his absence.
III Finding
8. The said applicant informed the court through his advocate that if the sub-division is to be taken up again he will suffer irreparable loss.
9. In this matter I find that a prima facie case has been made out against the respondent/defendant. The reasons being that once the Ministry of Land has made records concerning title it is only the court or the Registrar of Land who may in effect cancel the said title and or modify it. It seems that the defendant/respondent may require to obtain such orders prior to their exercise. If per chance they did obtain such authority, due process and natural justice requires that the said be communicated to the plaintiff accordingly.
10. I hereby give the orders of injunction with costs to the plaintiff applicant.
Dated this 17 day of October 2007 at Nairobi.
M.A. ANG’AWA
JUDGE
M.N. Oonge of M.N. OOnge & Co. Advocates for the plaintiff/applicant – present
J.K. Mbaluka for Mbaluka & Co. Advocates for the defendant/respondent – absent
during main application, present at reading of ruling only