[2017] KEELC 3478 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the grant of inhibition orders over the suit parcels, as they occupy the land and allege breach of trust by the defendant, who is threatening to alienate the land. The defendant did not oppose the application for inhibition, and the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 3478 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Jeniffer Muthio Mwendwa; Plaintiff: Clinton Kimathi Mwanzea; Plaintiff: Newton Kinyua Karuku; Plaintiff: Kenneth Musyoka Stephen; Defendant: Jackson Muthamia Nyaga alias Muthengi Nyaga
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 1 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition and Injunction
- Outcome
- application allowed in terms of prayers 3 and 6
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Trust Land, Inhibition Orders, Temporary Injunctions, Family Land Disputes
- 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
Jeniffer Muthio Mwendwa
Plaintiff
Clinton Kimathi Mwanzea
Plaintiff
Newton Kinyua Karuku
Plaintiff
Kenneth Musyoka Stephen
Plaintiff
Jackson Muthamia Nyaga alias Muthengi Nyaga
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition and Injunction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to orders of inhibition over parcels MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/2806, 2807 and 2808 pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether a temporary injunction should issue to restrain the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs' occupation and proprietary interests in the suit land.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the grant of inhibition orders over the suit parcels, as they occupy the land and allege breach of trust by the defendant, who is threatening to alienate the land. The defendant did not oppose the application for inhibition, and the court considered it necessary to preserve the subject matter of the suit pending its determination. The court therefore allowed the application in terms of the prayers seeking inhibition and directed compliance with pre-trial procedures to facilitate hearing of the main suit.
Court Disposition
application allowed in terms of prayers 3 and 6
Orders
- Order of inhibition granted over parcels MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/2806, 2807 and 2808 pending hearing and determination of the suit.
- Parties to comply with Order 11, Civil Procedure Rules, within 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO 01 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC CASE NO. 265 OF 2016
JENIFFER MUTHIO MWENDWA………………………………1ST PLAINTIFF
CLINTON KIMATHI MWANZEA……………………………….2ND PLAINTIFF
NEWTON KINYUA KARUKU…………………………………..3RD PLAINTIFF
KENNETH MUSYOKA STEPHEN ……………………..........…4TH PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JACKSON MUTHAMIA NYAGA ALIAS MUTHENGI NYAGA…..DEFENDANT
RULING
1. This application is dated 30. 11. 2016 and seeks orders:
1. That the honourable court be pleased to certify this application most urgent and the same be heard exparte in the first instance.
2. That the honourable court be pleased to issue orders of inhibition over all that parcel of land known as MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/2806, 2807 and 2808 pending interparties hearing of this application.
3. That this honourable court be pleased to issue order of inhibition over all that parcel of land known as MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/2806, 2807 and 2808 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
4. That this honourable court be pleased to issue an order of temporary injunction against the Respondent/Defendant his servants agents, employees, successors in title or anybody acting at his behalf or behest from encroaching, evicting and or interfering with the applicants occupation, user, business or in any other manner dealing with the proprietary interests of parcel No. MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/2806, 2807 and 2808 pending the hearing of this application or pending further orders of this court.
5. That this honourable court be pleased to issue an order of temporary inunction against the Respondent/Defendant his servants agents, employees, successors in title or anybody acting at his behalf or behest from encroaching, evicting and or interfering with the applicants occupation, user, business or in any other manner dealing with the proprietary interests of parcel No. MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/2806, 2807 and 2808 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
2. The application is supported by the affidavit of JENIFFER MUTHIO MWENDWA and has the following grounds:
i) That the 1st applicant is the step mother of the respondent while the 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents are nephews of the respondent ad all occupy land parcels No’s MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/2806, 2807 and 2808 which are a resultant subdivision of the original L.R NO.MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/464.
ii) That the respondent was registered as the holder of land REG NO.MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/464 on the 21st February, 1966 to hold as a trustee being the eldest son of Nyaga Mwendwa for all his siblings, stepmother and other family members.
iii) That in utter breach of that trust bestowed on the respondent/defendant he has threatened to alienate to third parties land parcels REG NO’s MAGUMONI/MUKUUNI/2806, 2807 and 2808.
iv) That 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th applicants and their family have no alternative land parcel to settle on or to derive their livelihood and will therefore suffer irreparably if the suit land are alienated.
v) That it is therefore imperative for this court to grant conservatory orders of inhibition to avoid any improper dealings in respect of the family land.
3. The application was heard on 7. 3.2017 when Mr Kaimenyi for the plaintiff asked the court to allow the application as it was not opposed.
4. Mr Muriithi for the defendant told the court that prayer 3 for inhibition could be confirmed so that the parties too could move to the hearing of the main suit.
5. I have considered the submissions proffered by the parties.
6. The application is allowed in terms of prayers 3 and 6.
7. The plaintiffs should fully comply with order 11, CPR, within 14 days of today and the plaintiff should do so within 14 days after receipt of the plaintiffs’ compliance documents.
8. Costs shall be in the cause.
9. It is so ordered.
10. Directions on 10. 4.2017.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 7th day of March, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Kaimenyi for the plaintiffs
Muriithi for the defendant
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE