[2019] KEELC 1569 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 1569 (KLR)

The court found that the defendant had failed to comply with a prior judgment and permanent injunction requiring removal of fencing and cessation of encroachment on the plaintiff’s land. The defendant neither responded to the enforcement application nor attended the hearing. Given the defendant’s continued...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 1569 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Julius Ngigi Munjuga; Defendant: The Chairman, Board of Governors, Murang’a College of Technology Primary School
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kerugoya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 614 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Enforcement Application
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Judgments, Police Assistance in Execution, Injunctive Relief, Land Encroachment
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Police Assistance in Execution Injunctive Relief Land Encroachment

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julius Ngigi Munjuga

Plaintiff

The Chairman, Board of Governors, Murang’a College of Technology Primary School

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Enforcement Application

  1. 1 Whether the court should order the removal of fencing erected by the defendant on the plaintiff’s land contrary to a prior judgment.
  2. 2 Whether police assistance should be granted to enforce the court’s orders and maintain peace during execution.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the application and execution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant had failed to comply with a prior judgment and permanent injunction requiring removal of fencing and cessation of encroachment on the plaintiff’s land. The defendant neither responded to the enforcement application nor attended the hearing. Given the defendant’s continued resistance and the sensitive context of executing a decree against a learning institution, the court determined that police assistance was necessary to maintain peace and order during execution. The court relied on precedent authorizing police involvement in similar circumstances and concluded that the orders sought were justified. The plaintiff was therefore permitted to remove the...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The plaintiff is allowed to remove the fencing put by the defendant around or across MURANGA MUNICIPALITY/BLOCK 11/257 at the defendant’s cost.
  • The Officer in Charge of Muranga Police Station is directed to provide security to the personnel engaged in the removal of the fencing.