[2020] KEELC 1437 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 1437 (KLR)

The court found that although the applicant alleged ongoing criminal activities and sought urgent intervention, the issues raised are intertwined with the substantive dispute in the main suit. The court determined that it was not appropriate to certify the matter as urgent at this interlocutory stage but recognized...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 1437 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Margaret Mukonatho; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: DLASO (Demarcation Land Surveyor Officer); Respondent: Land Adjudication Officer; Respondent: Chief Giithu Location; Respondent: Nahashon Karuti
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 37 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Urgent Orders and Inhibition
Outcome
Application for urgency declined; matter to be heard on priority basis.
Legal Topics
Land Adjudication, Inhibition Orders, Trespass, Urgent Applications
Source Language
en
Land and Property Land Adjudication Inhibition Orders Trespass Urgent Applications

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Margaret Mukonatho

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

DLASO (Demarcation Land Surveyor Officer)

Respondent

Land Adjudication Officer

Respondent

Chief Giithu Location

Respondent

Nahashon Karuti

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Urgent Orders and Inhibition

  1. 1 Whether the matter should be certified as urgent for purposes of granting interim orders.
  2. 2 Whether an inhibition order should be issued restraining the 5th respondent from trespassing on the applicant's land pending determination of the case.
  3. 3 Whether the O.C.S. Mikinduri Police Station should be ordered to enforce the court's orders.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the applicant alleged ongoing criminal activities and sought urgent intervention, the issues raised are intertwined with the substantive dispute in the main suit. The court determined that it was not appropriate to certify the matter as urgent at this interlocutory stage but recognized the need for expeditious handling. The court therefore declined to grant the urgent orders sought but directed that the application be heard on a priority basis before the judge handling the main suit. The rationale was that the main suit court is best placed to address the merits of the application and any interim relief, ensuring that the parties' rights are determined in the...

Court Disposition

Application for urgency declined; matter to be heard on priority basis.

Orders

  • The matter is not certified urgent but is to be heard on a priority basis.
  • The application will be placed before Hon. Lady Lucy Mbugua, ELC Judge, at Meru on 19th August, 2020.