[2014] KEELC 396 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiff admitted to being in rent arrears and failed to provide a lawful reason for the default. The Plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case with a probability of success, as required for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The court further held that it is not within its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEELC 396 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Justine Kazungu Baya; Defendant: Nairobi Homes (MSA) Ltd
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Malindi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 9 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- OA Angote
- Legal Topics
- Landlord Tenant Disputes, Interlocutory Injunctions, Rent Arrears, Eviction Proceedings
- 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
Justine Kazungu Baya
Plaintiff
Nairobi Homes (MSA) Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Plaintiff has established a prima facie case to warrant the grant of a temporary injunction restraining eviction from the suit premises.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to pay rent arrears in installments as proposed.
- 3 Whether the Plaintiff would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction is not granted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiff admitted to being in rent arrears and failed to provide a lawful reason for the default. The Plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case with a probability of success, as required for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The court further held that it is not within its power at the interlocutory stage to compel the Defendant to accept payment of arrears in installments or to dictate the manner of payment. The possibility of irreparable loss did not arise, as any loss could be compensated by damages and the Defendant was entitled to the rent due. Consequently, the Plaintiff's application for a temporary injunction was dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The Plaintiff's Application dated 29th January, 2014 is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT MALINDI
CIVIL CASE NO. 9 OF 2014
JUSTINE KAZUNGU BAYA..............PLAINTIFFS/APPLICANTS
=VERSUS=
NAIROBI HOMES (MSA) LTD.........DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
Introduction:
What is before me is the Plaintiff's Application dated 29th January, 2014 seeking for the following reliefs:
That there be a temporary injunction restraining the defendant by itself, agents, servants, legal representatives or any other person claiming interest through it from evicting,, denying the Plaintiff with access to his business or interfering with the Plaintiff’s smooth running of business in the suit premises on plot number 726 in any manner whatsoever pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
The costs of the application to be in the cause.
The Application is premised on the grounds that the Plaintiff has been a tenant of the Defendant for a period of more than ten years; that for some unavoidable reasons, the Plaintiff got into rent arrears commencing the month of January 2013 which accumulated to a sum of Kshs.275,600/= at the rate of Kshs. 40,000/= per month and that the Defendant has refused to take the accumulated rent arrears and has instead issued a notice under section 4(2) of the Land lord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishment) Act.
The Applicant finally averred in the grounds on the face of the Application and in the Supporting Affidavit that he is ready to deposit in court a sum of kshs. 60,000/= and clear the balance in a period of less than five months.
The Respondent's case:
In response, the Defendant's Managing Director has deponed that having issued a statutory notice, the land lord cannot accept rent; that the Applicant has without the consent of the landlord sub-let several portions of premises and that he has failed for a whole year to remit the full rent of Kshs.506,500/= as at the time of the statutory notice.
The Respondent's director finally deponed that the Plaintiff's suit has no chances of success because the Plaintiff has admitted that he is in rent arrears.
Submissions:
The parties disposed of the Application by way of written submissions. The Plaintiff's advocate submitted that his client is ready to pay the rent arrears in a period of five months and that the premises are commercial in nature and have earned goodwill.
The Plaintiff's counsel submitted that if the Plaintiff is evicted, his suit shall be rendered nugatory.
The Defendant's counsel on the either hand submitted that the act of payment of rent by a tenant takes precedence; that the Plaintiff is not even offering to deposit the whole rent arrears in court and this court cannot allow him to pay the said arrears in installments.
According to the Defendant's counsel, the Defendant wants vacant possession of the suit premises together with mesne profits as pleaded in the counter-claim.
Analysis and findings:
The Plaintiff has admitted that he has defaulted in paying rent to the Defendant for a period of about five months. The Plaintiff has not given any lawful reason for the default other than stating that it was due to “some unavoidable circumstances”.
The Plaintiff wants this court to issue restraining orders as against the Defendant and to be allowed to pay the rent arrears in installments.
It is not in the province of this court, at an interlocutory stage, to dictate to the parties how the rent arrears should be paid. Indeed, this court cannot compel the Defendant to agree the arrangement that has been proposed by the Plaintiff on how he wants to settle the rent arrears in view of the fact there is no judgment on record.
In the circumstances, I find and hold that the Plaintiff has not established a prima facie case with chances of success to warrant this court to grant him an order of injunction. The issue of the Plaintiff suffering irreparable loss that cannot be compensated by way of damages does not arise considering that the Defendant is entitled to the rent that is due and owing.
Consequently, and for the reasons I have given above, I dismiss the Plaintiff's Application dated 29th January, 2014 with costs.
Dated and delivered in Malindi this9thday of May, 2014.
O. A. Angote
Judge