[2014] KEHC 2508 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff's application for a temporary injunction was unopposed due to the defendant's failure to file and exchange submissions as directed. Given the prolonged delay in concluding the application and the absence of any response from the defendant, the court allowed the application for a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 2508 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Isabella Kanugu Riungu; Defendant: Joseph Kirimi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 37 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- Application for temporary injunction allowed.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Temporary Injunction, Land Disputes, Possession of Land
- 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
Isabella Kanugu Riungu
Plaintiff
Joseph Kirimi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with her two acres portion of land parcel No. KIBIRICHIA/454 pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the defendant's failure to file and exchange submissions affects the determination of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff's application for a temporary injunction was unopposed due to the defendant's failure to file and exchange submissions as directed. Given the prolonged delay in concluding the application and the absence of any response from the defendant, the court allowed the application for a temporary injunction to preserve the status quo pending the hearing and determination of the suit. The court exercised its discretion in favour of the plaintiff to prevent possible irreparable harm and to ensure the effective administration of justice.
Court Disposition
Application for temporary injunction allowed.
Orders
- A temporary injunction is issued restraining the defendant, his employees, agents, servants, or any person acting under his direction from entering, working, dealing, or interfering in any manner with the plaintiff's two acres portion in land parcel No. KIBIRICHIA/454 pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
- The orders to be served upon the O.C.C. Subuiga police station for implementation.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND CASE NO. 37 OF 2012
ISABELLA KANUGU RIUNGU...............................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JOSEPH KIRIMI.....................................................................................DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
This application is dated 5th November 2013 and seeks orders:
THATthis application be certified urgent and heard on priority basis.
THATthis Honourable court be pleased to issue an order of temporary injunction restraining the Defendant/Respondent or his employees, agents and/or servants or any other person acting under his directions from entering into, working, dealing and/or interfering in any manner whatsoever with the Applicant's/Plaintiff's two (2) acres portion in suit land parcel No. KIBIRICHIA/454 pending the inter-partes hearing of this application.
THATthis Honourable court be pleased to issue an order of temporary injunction restraining the Defendant/Respondent or his employees, agents and/or servants or any other person acting under his direction from entering into, working, dealing and/or interfering in any manner whatsoever with the Applicant's/Plaintiff's two (2) acres portion in suit land parcel No. KIBIRICHIA/454 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
THATthis Honourable court be pleased to order that the orders be served upon the O.C.C. Subuiga police station for implementation.
THATthe costs of this application be provided for.
Today's mention date for directions had been fixed by consent. However, the advocate for the defendant did not avail himself in Court. On 16. 12. 13 this Court had directed that parties file and exchange written submissions regarding the application within 14 days. The defendant has not filed and exchanged his submissions. It is noted that this application has not been concluded for about 8 months.
In the circumstances, I allow the application.
Costs shall be in the cause.
It is so ordered.
Delivered in Open Court this 25th day of June, 2014 in the presence :
Cc Daniel
Miss Thibaru for plaintiff.
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE