[2021] KEELC 562 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 562 (KLR)

The court found that the orders sought by the applicant, particularly eviction, were final in nature and could not be granted at the interlocutory stage. The application was considered within the established principles for interlocutory injunctions as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown. The applicant failed to meet...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELC 562 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kahindi Muhambi Gona; Respondent: Mbarak Silemani Sehet; Respondent: Cecilia Wauthira Njoroge; Respondent: Sa1di Hamisi Haffidha; Respondent: Mariam Awadh Abel; Respondent: Esther Kerubo Ongera; Respondent: Chibungu Mwarumba; Respondent: Edwin Toizi Wafula; Respondent: Thomas Mdozmba; Respondent: Nancy Cheptoo; Respondent: Mbarak Sileiman Edha; Respondent: Mary Janet Kanyeria; Respondent: Land Registrar, Kilifi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 123 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction and Eviction Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
NA Matheka
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Eviction Orders, Trespass, Proprietary Rights
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Interlocutory Injunctions Eviction Orders Trespass Proprietary Rights

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kahindi Muhambi Gona

Applicant

Mbarak Silemani Sehet

Respondent

Cecilia Wauthira Njoroge

Respondent

Sa1di Hamisi Haffidha

Respondent

Mariam Awadh Abel

Respondent

Esther Kerubo Ongera

Respondent

Chibungu Mwarumba

Respondent

Edwin Toizi Wafula

Respondent

Thomas Mdozmba

Respondent

Nancy Cheptoo

Respondent

Mbarak Sileiman Edha

Respondent

Mary Janet Kanyeria

Respondent

Land Registrar, Kilifi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction and Eviction Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case for grant of interlocutory injunction against the respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an eviction order at the interlocutory stage.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the orders sought by the applicant, particularly eviction, were final in nature and could not be granted at the interlocutory stage. The application was considered within the established principles for interlocutory injunctions as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown. The applicant failed to meet the threshold for grant of such orders, and the court held that the application was not merited. The absence of a response from the respondents did not alter the requirement for the applicant to satisfy the legal criteria for interlocutory relief. Consequently, the application was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.