[2016] KEHC 540 (KLR)
The court found that the suit could be marked as settled with no order as to costs, provided that the Plaintiffs had fully vacated the suit premises. If the Plaintiffs had not vacated, an eviction order would issue with police assistance. The court's decision was based on the parties' mutual consent to settle the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 540 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: John Nkonge M'Arithi; Plaintiff: Magdaline Nyambura; Plaintiff: Joyce Mboya; Defendant: Peninah Nkatha; Defendant: Chris Kinyua Wanjagi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 114 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Judgment
- Outcome
- Suit marked as settled with no order as to costs, conditional on Plaintiffs vacating the premises; eviction to follow if not vacated.
- Legal Topics
- Eviction, Injunctions, Vacant Possession
- 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
John Nkonge M'Arithi
Plaintiff
Magdaline Nyambura
Plaintiff
Joyce Mboya
Plaintiff
Peninah Nkatha
Defendant
Chris Kinyua Wanjagi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st Defendant's notice to vacate was valid.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to a permanent injunction restraining eviction from Plot No. NTIMA/IGOKI/2079.
- 3 Whether the suit should be marked as settled with no order as to costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the suit could be marked as settled with no order as to costs, provided that the Plaintiffs had fully vacated the suit premises. If the Plaintiffs had not vacated, an eviction order would issue with police assistance. The court's decision was based on the parties' mutual consent to settle the matter on these terms, and the Plaintiffs' willingness to forgo costs. The court thus balanced the interests of both parties, ensuring that the Defendants' right to possession would be protected if the Plaintiffs failed to vacate, while also respecting the Plaintiffs' request to settle the matter amicably.
Court Disposition
Suit marked as settled with no order as to costs, conditional on Plaintiffs vacating the premises; eviction to follow if not vacated.
Orders
- The suit is marked settled with no orders as to costs as long as it is established that the Plaintiff has vacated the suit premises.
- In the event that the Plaintiff has not fully vacated Plot No. NTIMA/IGOKI/2079, an order is issued that he be evicted from the premises with the assistance of the O.C.S Meru Police Station.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND CASE NO 114 OF 2016
JOHN NKONGE M'ARITHI..........................................1ST PLAINTIFF
MAGDALINE NYAMBURA..........................................2ND PLAINTIFF
JOYCE MBOYA...........................................................3RD PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
PENINAH NKATHA.................................................1ST DEFENDANT
CHRIS KINYUA WANJAGI....................................2ND DEFENDANT
J U D G M E N T
1. The Plaintiff in his Plaint dated 27/07/2016 seeks orders against the defendants jointly and severally for:-
a) A declaration that the 1st Defendant's notice to the Plaintiffs to vacate the demised premises on Plot No. NTIMA/IGOKI/2079 dated 23/06/2016 is null and void.
b) An order of permanent injunction do issue restraining the 1st Defendant, whether by herself, her employees, agency, servants or anyone acting at their behest from unlawfully evicting the Plaintiffs from the demised premises on the subject plot herein.
c) Costs of the suit and interests.
2. On 20/12/2016, the 1st Plaintiff told the Court that he had vacated the suit premises. He asked the Court to mark the suit as settled without no order as to costs.
3. Mr. Muriuki, the Plaintiff's Advocate, told the Court that he was amenable to the Plaintiff's request BUT only if the Plaintiff fully vacates the Defendant's premises.
4. Mr. Muriuki told the Court that his clients were willing to forgo costs.
5. In the circumstances , it is ordered as follows:-
(1) The suit is marked settled with no orders as to costs as long as it is established that the Plaintiff has vacated the suit premises.
(2) In the event that the Plaintiff has not fully vacated Plot No. NTIMA/IGOKI/2079, an order is issued that he be evicted from the premises with the assistance of the O.C.S Meru Police Station.
6. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
C:A Daniel/James
John Nkonge M'Arithi- 1st Plaintifff
Ken Muriuki for the Defendants
P.M.NJOROGE
JUDGE