https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5306

**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NANDI COUNTY** **KAPSABET ELCLOS NO. E017 OF 2026** **LAZARUS KIRUI KIPKIRWA………………APPLICANT/PLAINTIFF** **VERSUS** **KIBET ARAP MELE……………….……..RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT** **RULING** 1. In the application by way of a Notice of Motion dated 6th August 2026, the applicant/plaintiff through Kipruto and Mabalu Advocates LP is seeking, inter alia, that the status quo on the ground be maintained in regard to 3.723 hectares (9.2 acres) comprised in the suit land reference No. **NANDI/CHEPTIL/105** and/or its resultant subdivision pending the hearing and determination of the application. 2. During inter-partes hearing of the application, Ms Mabalu learned counsel for the applicant referred to the application, the respondent’s preliminary objection dated 13th July 2026 to the suit and stated that there is no response to the application duly served. That therefore, status quo be granted in terms of prayer 3 in the application. That her client does not occupy the suit land. 3. Ms. Isiaho learned counsel sought three days to respond to the application. That the suit land is registered in the name of the respondent and that no opposition to status quo but the same be limited to registration and occupation of the suit land. That the preliminary objection on grounds which include res judicata and sub judice, be fast tracked in the instant suit. 4. In that regard, it is common ground that the preliminary objection be heard on priority basis and that status quo pertaining to registration and occupation of the suit land be maintained by the parties herein. 5. The application is for hearing today and further to section 13 (7) of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015 (2011) and Practice Direction number 32 of the Environment and Land Court Directions 2014, this Honourable court is mandated to grant interim preservation orders which include status quo over the suit land in the circumstances. 6. Furthermore, it is trite law that the court can issue status quo orders with precision to ensure no disturbance on the suit property status pending the outcome or termination of the case; **see Kenya Peasants League vs Attorney General & 19 others {2025} KECA 448 (KLR) and Kithaka vs Wangari & 3 others [2026} KECA 255 (KLR).** 7. In the result, **IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT;** 8. Order number 3 sought in the application is partially merited and allowed on the terms that the prevailing status quo over the suit land be maintained by the parties pending the outcome of the application and the preliminary objection. In particular, that the suit land to remain registered in the name of the respondent, that the applicant is not in possession of the suit land and that there be no sale, charge, transfer, sub division or disposal of the suit land or any portion thereof and no erection of permanent structures thereon pending the hearing and determination of the preliminary objection and the application. 9. That the preliminary objection to take precedence over all other matters herein and the same be heard by written submissions. 10. So, learned counsel for the respondent to file and serve submissions on the preliminary objection together with any replying affidavit to the application within the next three days from this date. 11. Learned counsel for the applicant to file and serve submissions together with any supplementary affidavit within three days upon service of the respondent’s submissions and response. 12. The matter is set for 26th August 2026 to confirm compliance and for further directions. 13. It is so ordered. **Dated** and **Delivered** **Virtually** this **18th day of August 2026.** **HON. G M A ONGONDO** **VACATION DUTY JUDGE** **In the presence of:** 1. Ms. Mabalu learned counsel for the applicant 2. Ms. Isiaho learned counsel for the respondent 3. Mr. Kariuki, court assistant