[2017] KEELC 2886 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants established a prima facie case with a probability of success regarding Land Parcels LR. E.Wanga/Malaha/1163 and 1165, as they are the registered owners and the defendants had trespassed and cultivated these parcels without any legal right. There was no evidence of ownership for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 2886 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Johnson Wyclife Ambani; Plaintiff: John Omuyula M. Odinga; Defendant: Henry Lubanga Mwimali; Defendant: Michael Otinga Mwimali
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 191 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Injunction Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
- Outcome
- interlocutory injunction granted in part
- Judges
- NA Matheka
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Injunctions, Trespass to Land, Ownership 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
Johnson Wyclife Ambani
Plaintiff
John Omuyula M. Odinga
Plaintiff
Henry Lubanga Mwimali
Defendant
Michael Otinga Mwimali
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants have established a prima facie case with a probability of success for grant of a temporary injunction.
- 2 Whether the applicants would suffer irreparable harm not compensable by damages if the injunction is not granted.
- 3 Whether the balance of convenience favors the grant of an injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing or cultivating the suit land.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants established a prima facie case with a probability of success regarding Land Parcels LR. E.Wanga/Malaha/1163 and 1165, as they are the registered owners and the defendants had trespassed and cultivated these parcels without any legal right. There was no evidence of ownership for parcel 1164. The application was unopposed, and the risk of irreparable harm was established. Applying the principles from Giella v Cassman Brown, the court granted a temporary injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from trespassing, encroaching, or cultivating parcels 1163 and 1165 pending determination of the suit. Costs were ordered to be in the cause.
Court Disposition
interlocutory injunction granted in part
Orders
- Pending hearing and determination of the suit, a temporary injunction is issued restraining the defendants, their family, servants, or any person acting or claiming on their behalf from trespassing, encroaching onto, or cultivating land parcels LR. E. Wanga/Malaha/1163 and 1165 in any manner whatsoever.
- Costs of the application to be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF KENYA
AT KAKAMEGA
ELC CASE NO. 191 OF 2016
JOHNSON WYCLIFE AMBANI
JOHN OMUYULA M. ODINGA.......................PLAINTIFFS/APPLICANTS
VERSUS
HENRY LUBANGA MWIMALI
MICHAEL OTINGA MWIMALI................DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS
RULING
This application is brought under Section 3A and 63 (e) of the Civil Procedure Act Order 40 and Order 51 rule 1 seeking the following orders;
1. That this application be certified urgent, service be dispensed with in the 1st instance and it be heard on priority basis.
2. That pending the hearing and determination of this application interparties, an interim order of injunction e and is hereby issued against the defendants, their family, agent, servants or any other person claiming/acting on their behalf restraining them from trespassing, encroaching onto land parcels E. Wanga/Malaha/1163, 1164 and 1165 and cultivating or use of the same in any manner.
3. That pending the hearing and determination of this suit, an order of temporary injunction be issued directed against the defendants, their family, servants, or other person acting or claiming on their behalf be restrained from trespassing, encroaching onto land parcels LR. E. Wanga/Malaha/1163, 1164 and 1165 and cultivating or use the same in any manner whatsoever.
4. That costs be provided for.
The application is supported by the affidavits of John O.M. Odinga and Johnson W. Ambani. The Applicants submitted that, the plaintiffs/ applicants are the sole absolute registered owners of Land Parcels LR. E.Wanga/Malaha/1163,1164 and 1165. The defendants have their own land parcels – LR. E. Wanga/Malaha/1166 and 1162. The defendants have no beneficiary, purchasers or any other interest or rights in the subject matter. The defendants have trespassed onto, cultivated portions of the subject matters, planted maize on the subject matters. The actions of the defendants are illegal, calculated to prejudice and provoke the plaintiffs. The defendants stand to suffer irreparable loss.
The defendants/respondents were served and failed to attend court. Neither did they file any papers in opposition hence the matter proceeded unopposed.
This court has considered both the Applicant’s and the 3rd and 4th Defendants /Respondents’ submissions and the supporting affidavits therein. The application being one that seeks injunctions, has to be considered within the principles set out in the case of GIELLA VS CASSMAN BROWN & CO. LTD 1973 E.A 358 and which are:-
1. The applicant must show a prima facie case with a probability of success at the trial
2. The applicant must show that unless the order is granted, he will suffer loss which cannot be adequately compensated in damages and,
3. If in doubt, the Court will decide the application on a balance of convenience.
It must also be added that an interlocutory injunction is an equitable relief and the Court may decline to grant it if it can be shown that the applicant’s conduct pertinent to the subject matter of the suit does not meet the approval of a Court of equity.
The Applicants submitted that, the plaintiffs/ applicants are the sole absolute registered owners of Land Parcels LR. E.Wanga/Malaha/1163, 1164 and 1165. The defendants have trespassed onto, cultivated portions of the said land, planted maize on the said land. The parties in this suit appear to be siblings. Be that as it may and from perusal of the documents annexed to the pleadings it would appear that the applicants/ plaintiffs are the registered owners of Land Parcels LR. E.Wanga/Malaha/1163, and 1165. No evidence of ownership of Parcels LR. E.Wanga/Malaha/1164 was adduced.The application was not opposed. The defendants have established a prima facie case with the probability of success. I find this application has merit to that extend and grant prayer 3 of the application with the following modifications that;
1. That pending the hearing and determination of this suit, an order of temporary injunction be issued directed against the defendants, their family, servants or other person acting or claiming on their behalf be restrained from trespassing, encroaching onto land parcels LR. E. Wanga/Malaha/1163 and 1165 and cultivating or use the same in any manner whatsoever.
2. Costs of this application to be in the cause.
Orders accordingly.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA IN OPEN COURT THIS 9TH DAY OF MAY 2017.
N.A. MATHEKA
JUDGE