[2016] KEHC 2483 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for the grant of a temporary injunction, as he demonstrated ownership and continuous use of the suit property and alleged fraudulent registration of the 1st defendant as a joint owner without his consent. The defendants, despite being properly...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 2483 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Joshua Karuti M'Erimba; Defendant: Elizabeth Mwothabuambi; Defendant: Francis M'Thirari; Defendant: M'Mungania Baimula; Defendant: District Land Adjudication Settlement Officer, Igembe Sub-County; Defendant: District Land Registrar, Igembe Sub-County; Defendant: Attorney General
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 144 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- interlocutory injunction granted; costs in the cause
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Injunctive Relief, Land Ownership, Fraudulent Registration, Adverse 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
Joshua Karuti M'Erimba
Plaintiff
Elizabeth Mwothabuambi
Defendant
Francis M'Thirari
Defendant
M'Mungania Baimula
Defendant
District Land Adjudication Settlement Officer, Igembe Sub-County
Defendant
District Land Registrar, Igembe Sub-County
Defendant
Attorney General
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 1st and 2nd defendants from interfering with his use and occupation of land parcel No. Naathu/Naathu/3325 or 4675 pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the 1st defendant was fraudulently registered as a joint owner of the suit property without the plaintiff's consent.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for the grant of a temporary injunction, as he demonstrated ownership and continuous use of the suit property and alleged fraudulent registration of the 1st defendant as a joint owner without his consent. The defendants, despite being properly served, failed to appear or contest the application. In the absence of opposition and upon consideration of the affidavit of service and the grounds presented, the court deemed the application unopposed and allowed it. Consequently, the court granted the prayer for a temporary injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's use and...
Court Disposition
interlocutory injunction granted; costs in the cause
Orders
- A temporary injunction is issued restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants, their employees, agents, representatives, family or any person acting on their behalf from constructing, entering, dealing or in any other way interfering with the plaintiff's use and occupation of land parcel No. Naathu/Naathu/3325 or part of...
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
34 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
ENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CASE NO. 144 OF 2016
JOSHUA KARUTI M'ERIMBA.....................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ELIZABETH MWOTHABUAMBI.....................................1ST DEFENDANT
FRANCIS M'THIRARI.....................................................2ND DEFENDANT
M'MUNGANIA BAIMULA...............................................3RD DEFENDANT
DISTRICT LAND ADJUDICATION
SETTLEMENT OFFICER, IGEMBE SUB-COUNTY.......4TH DEFENDANT
THE DISTRICT LAND REGISTRAR
IGEMBE SUB-COUNTY..................................................5TH DEFENDANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL....................................................6TH DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
1. This application is dated 29/082016 and seeks orders: -
1. That the application herein be certified as urgent and be heard exparte in the 1st instance.
2. THAT the Honourable Court be pleased to issue temporary order of injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants themselves, employees, agents, representatives, family or any person acting on their behest from constructing,entering ,dealing or in any other way interfering with the Plaintiff user and occupation of land parcel No. Naathu/Naathu/3325 or part of it referred by the defendants as parcel No. Naathu 4675 pending the hearing and determination of this application or until further orders of the Court.
3. THAT the honourable Court be pleased to issue temporary order of injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants themselves , employees, agents, representatives, family or any other acting on their behest from constructing, entering ,dealing or in any other way interfering with the Plaintiff user and occupation of land parcel No. Naathu/Naathu/3325 on part of it referred by defendants as 4675 parcel No. Naathu/Naathu /4675 pending the hearing and determination of this suit or until further orders of this Court.
4. Costs be in cause.
2. The Application is supported by the Affidavit of JOSHUA KARUTI M'ERIMBA, the Applicant, and has the following grounds:-
1. THAT the Plaintiff is the beneficial, rightful, the registered and the legal owner of land parcel No. Naathu/Naathu/3325.
2. THAT the Plaintiff got ownership of land parcel No. Naathu/Naathu/3325 from his late father one NTOERIMBA THILANGE who gave him the same in the year early 1990's and he has been using it since then to date.
3. THAT the 1st defendant illegally and fraudulently colluded with the office of the 4th and 5th Defendants into registering the 1st defendant as a joint owner of parcel No. Naathu/Naathu/3325 without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff.
3. When the Application was slated for interpartes hearing on 13/09/2016, the Defendants/ Respondents were not in Court.
4. Advocate Mutembei for the Applicant told the Court that the parties were properly served with the date for interparties hearing. He referred the Court to the apposite Affidavit of service. He asked the Court to allow the application.
5. In the absence of the Defendants/Respondents and despite serve, the application is deemed allowed.
6. Prayer 3 is granted.
7. Costs shall be in the cause.
8. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
CC: Lilian /Daniel
Miss Muna h/b Mutembei for Plaintiff
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE