[2018] KEELC 3645 (KLR)
The court found that there is an ongoing succession dispute between the parties, with both sides making claims to the suit land. In the absence of a substantive response to the defendants' affidavit and lacking further documentary evidence, the court determined that the appropriate course is to preserve the status...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 3645 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Julius Wasilwa Nate (Suing as Administrator of the Estate of Chilson Muumbwa Nate); Defendant: Robert Kelongi; Defendant: Paul Sirengo; Defendant: Jim Misiko; Defendant: Kevin Sirengo; Defendant: Samuel Lusweti
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Land Case 18 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- Status quo order granted; neither party to dispose of or waste the suit land pending determination of the suit.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Temporary Injunction, Succession Dispute, Estate Administration, Waste of Land
- 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
Julius Wasilwa Nate (Suing as Administrator of the Estate of Chilson Muumbwa Nate)
Plaintiff
Robert Kelongi
Defendant
Paul Sirengo
Defendant
Jim Misiko
Defendant
Kevin Sirengo
Defendant
Samuel Lusweti
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the suit land pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the defendants, as non-beneficiaries, have any right to occupy or deal with the estate property.
- 3 Whether the actions of the parties amount to waste or improper disposal of the estate property.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there is an ongoing succession dispute between the parties, with both sides making claims to the suit land. In the absence of a substantive response to the defendants' affidavit and lacking further documentary evidence, the court determined that the appropriate course is to preserve the status quo. Neither party should dispose of or commit acts of waste on the land until the main suit is heard and determined. The court declined to grant the specific temporary injunction sought by the plaintiff but instead ordered maintenance of the status quo to prevent further conflict or prejudice to any party's interests in the estate property.
Court Disposition
Status quo order granted; neither party to dispose of or waste the suit land pending determination of the suit.
Orders
- Neither the plaintiff nor the defendants shall dispose of any interest in or commit acts of waste on the land until the hearing and determination of this suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT KITALE
LAND CASE NO. 18 OF 2018
JULIUS WASILWA NATE
(Suing as Administrator of the Estate of
CHILSON MUUMBWA NATE).................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ROBERT KELONGI........................................................1ST DEFENDANT
PAUL SIRENGO ............................................................2ND DEFENDANT
JIM MISIKO...................................................................3RD DEFENDANT
KEVIN SIRENGO ...........................................................4TH DEFENDANT
SAMUEL LUSWETI........................................................5TH DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
1. The application dated 13/2/2018 seeks an order of temporary injunction to restrain the defendants from trespassing, leasing, selling, dealing or in any manner whatsoever interfering with the portion measuring 1. 09 acres of the suit land in Title No. Kiminini/Matunda Block 7/164 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
2. The grounds upon which the application is made is that the land is registered in the name of Chilson Muumbwa Nate (deceased), and as such forms part of the Estate of the deceased to which the defendants, being not beneficiaries, are not entitled. It is claimed that the defendants are wasting the land by destroying the trees thereon and that a restraining order is needed.
3. A copy of the title to the land is exhibited; it is in the name of one Chilson Nate, whom I will presume is the deceased. The applicant has not exhibited any grant save a Limited Grant of Letters of Administration ad Litem to the Estate of the deceased. Some photographs attached to the supporting affidavit show some felled trees and wooden posts freshly erected on the land.
4. Samuel Lusweti the 6th defendant filed a replying affidavit on behalf of all defendants. The defendants’ affidavit seems to acknowledge that the land in question, Kiminini/Matunda Block 7/164 belonged to their late grandfather. The defendants appear to doubt the bona fides of actions of the applicant whom they say has irregularly disposed of much of the property that comprised their late grandfather’s Estate; they acknowledge that the plaintiff is their stepfather and aver that he sold all the properties “except” the suit land when their fathers died; the defendants state that they need a share of the property so they can get a place to live on. They accuse the plaintiff of also disposing of properties belonging to their late fathers located at Sikhendu when they were young and further aver that their clan has ruled that they have a share of the remaining land.
5. They aver that they have no intention to sell the land herein but to live on it and that it is the plaintiff who has put up a sign advertising the land for sale.
6. I have considered the application and the response. There seems to be a simmering succession dispute between the parties which in my view is suitable for resolution by the High Court. There is also no response to the defendants’ replying affidavit and those facts stated therein cannot be casually dismissed.
7. In the absence of any other documents to rely on, I will order that the status quo of the suit land be maintained in that neither the plaintiff nor the defendants shall dispose of any interest in or commit acts of waste on the land till the hearing and determination of this suit.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kitale on this 20th day of March, 2018.
MWANGI NJOROGE
JUDGE
20/3/2018
Coram:
Before - Mwangi Njoroge - Judge
Court Assistant - Picoty
N/A for plaintiff
N/A for defendant
COURT
Ruling read in open court in the absence of parties.
MWANGI NJOROGE
JUDGE
20/3/2018