[2021] KEELC 2794 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs/applicants had demonstrated a prima facie case by showing they purchased and took possession of the suit property, registered the transfer, and maintained exclusive possession. The 1st defendant did not establish that it was in possession of the property. Given the conflicting...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 2794 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Kenya Wildlife Service Staff Superannuation Scheme Registered Trustees; Plaintiff: Kenya Wildlife Staff Retirement Benefits Scheme 2006 Registered Trustees; Defendant: Dykcoe Enterprises Limited; Defendant: Nephets Interlink Service Limited; Defendant: The Chief Land Registrar; Defendant: The Honourable Attorney General; Defendant: County Government of Nairobi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E010 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- LC Komingoi
- Legal Topics
- Temporary Injunctions, Ownership Disputes, Land Title, Possession, Trespass, Preservation of Property
- 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
Kenya Wildlife Service Staff Superannuation Scheme Registered Trustees
Plaintiff
Kenya Wildlife Staff Retirement Benefits Scheme 2006 Registered Trustees
Plaintiff
Dykcoe Enterprises Limited
Defendant
Nephets Interlink Service Limited
Defendant
The Chief Land Registrar
Defendant
The Honourable Attorney General
Defendant
County Government of Nairobi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs/applicants have met the threshold for grant of a temporary injunction.
- 2 Who should bear the costs of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs/applicants had demonstrated a prima facie case by showing they purchased and took possession of the suit property, registered the transfer, and maintained exclusive possession. The 1st defendant did not establish that it was in possession of the property. Given the conflicting claims of ownership and the need to preserve the property pending the hearing and determination of the main suit, the court held that the interests of justice required the issuance of a temporary injunction to maintain the status quo. The question of how LR No 1/287 became LR No 1/1406 would be resolved at trial. Costs were ordered to abide the outcome of the main suit.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- A temporary injunction is issued restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants, their agents, servants, or any other person acting for them from trespassing into LR No 1/287 Lenana Road, Kilimani, Nairobi or interfering with the plaintiffs' exclusive possession, occupation, and user thereof until the suit is heard and...
- The plaintiffs/applicants shall not develop, undertake construction, dispose of, or lease out LR No 1/287, Lenana Road, Nairobi, pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
49 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT NAIROBI
ELC CASE NO. E010 OF 2020
KENYA WILDLIFE SERVICE STAFF SUPERNNUATION SCHEME
REGISTERED TRUSTEES..................................................................1ST PLAINTIFF
KENYA WILDLIFE STAFF RETIREMENT BENEFITS SCHEME 2006
REGISTERED TRUSTEES.................................................................2ND PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
DYKOE ENTERPRISES LIMITED...............................................1ST DEFENDANT
NEPHETS INTERLINK SERVICE LIMITED.............................2ND DEFENDANT
THE CHIEF LAND REGISTRAR..................................................3RD DEFENDANT
THE HONOURABLE ATTORNEY GENERAL...........................4TH DEFENDANT
COUNTY GOVERNMENT OF NAIROBI....................................5TH DEFENDANT
RULING
1. This is the Notice of Motion dated 13th July 2020 brought under order 40 rule 1, 2 and 4 order 51 rule 1 and 3 and Section 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. It seeks orders:-
1. Spent.
2. Spent.
3. That the Honourable Court be pleased to grant an order of temporary injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants together with their agents, servants, and/or any other person acting for them from trespassing into the plaintiffs’/applicants’ parcel of land number LR No 1/287 Lenana Road, Kilimani, Nairobi or in any other way interfering with the plaintiffs’/applicants’ exclusive possession, occupation and user thereof until this suit is heard and determined or until further orders of the court.
4. That costs of this application be provided for.
3. The grounds are on the face of the application and are set out in paragraphs (1) to (8).
4. The application is supported by the affidavit sworn by Edwin Wanyonyi, Chairman of the 1st plaintiffs’/applicants’ Board of Trustees, on the 13th July 2020.
5. The application is opposed. There is a replying affidavit sworn by Diana Koech, a co- director of the 1st defendant/respondent sworn on the 22nd July 2020. There are also responses filed by the 3rd to 5th defendants/respondents.
6. On the 28th July 2020 the court with the consent of parties directed that the Notice of Motion be canvassed by way of written submissions.
7. I have considered the Notice of Motion and the supporting affidavit together with the annexures. I have also considered the affidavits in response and the annexures, the written submissions filed on behalf of the respective parties and the authorities cited.
8. The issues for determination are:-
(i) Whether the plaintiffs/applicants application meets the threshold of grant of temporary injunction.
(ii) Who should bear costs of the application?
9. In an application for injunction the onus is on the application to satisfy the court that it should grant an injunction. The principle were laid down the precedent setting of Giella vs Cassman Brown & Co. Ltd [1973] EA 358. In the case of Mrao Ltd vs First American Bank of Kenya Limited & 2 Others [2003] KLR 125 the Court of Appeal set out what amounts to a prima facie case. I am guided by the above authorities.
10. It is the plaintiffs’/applicants’ case that they bought the suit property LR NO 1/287 Lenana Road form Ultramod Holdings Limited on 26th April 2016 for a consideration of Kshs. 520,000,000/-. That a transfer in their favour was duly registered on 16th June 2016 and they took possession in December 2016. That upon taking possession a perimeter fence was reinforced and a gate installed. They retained the services of Fidelity Security Services Ltd to guard the same.
11. The 1st defendant on the other hand contends that it is the registered owner of LR NO 1/1406, Lenana Road following a transfer by the 2nd defendant in its favour. I have gone through the replying affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st defendant. It does not state that they are in possession of the suit property.
12. I have considered the rival positions as to who owns the suit property. I find that it is in the interest of justice that the same is preserved pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
13. The issue as to how LR NO 1/287 became LR 1/1406 will be resolved during the hearing where evidence will be tendered by the parties.
14. The upshot of the matter is that the plaintiffs’/applicants’ application succeeds I find merit in this application and the same is allowed in the following terms.
(a) That a temporary injunction is hereby issued restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants together with their agents, servants, and/or any other person acting for them from trespassing into the plaintiffs’/applicants’ parcel of land number LR No 1/287 Lenana Road, Kilimani, Nairobi or in any other way interfering with the plaintiffs’/applicants’ exclusive possession, occupation and user thereof until this suit is heard and determined.
(b) That the plaintiffs/applicants shall not develop and or undertake any construction, or dispose of, lease out the suit property LR NO 1/287, Lenana Road, Nairobi, pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
(c) That costs of this application do abide the outcome of the main suit
It is so ordered.
Dated, signed and delivered in Nairobi on this 17th day of June 2021.
............................
L. KOMINGOI
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mr. Kagicha for the Plaintiffs
Mr. Were for Mr. B. K. Khaemba for 1st – 2nd Defendants
Mr. Menge for 3rd – 4th Defendants
Mr. Karisa for Mr. G. Kithi for 5th Defendant
Phyllis – Court Assistant