[2009] KEHC 215 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 215 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent, as the registered proprietor under Section 27 of the Registered Land Act, holds absolute ownership of the suit property. The court further held that it would be unlawful to fetter the respondent's rights by granting an inhibition order. Additionally, the court determined that the application was procedurally defective, as it was brought by originating summons in an originating summons suit, contrary to Order XXXVI Rule 3F of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires such applications to be made by chamber summons in a pending suit. Consequently, the application lacked merit both substantively and procedurally and was dismissed.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 215 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mary Chepocheyento Atom; Defendant: Atom Deya Paul
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kitale
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
3 June 2009
Case Number
Civil Case 83 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Inhibition Order
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Inhibition Orders, Registered Land Act, Matrimonial Property Rights, Procedure for Interlocutory Applications
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Inhibition Orders Registered Land Act Matrimonial Property Rights Procedure for Interlocutory Applications

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Chepocheyento Atom

Plaintiff

Atom Deya Paul

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Inhibition Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an inhibition order should be granted to prevent dealings with land parcel No. West Pokot/Chepareria/107 pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the application for inhibition was properly brought under the relevant procedural rules.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff/applicant has established sufficient grounds for the preservation of the suit property.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent, as the registered proprietor under Section 27 of the Registered Land Act, holds absolute ownership of the suit property. The court further held that it would be unlawful to fetter the respondent's rights by granting an inhibition order. Additionally, the court determined that the application was procedurally defective, as it was brought by originating summons in an originating summons suit, contrary to Order XXXVI Rule 3F of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires such applications to be made by chamber summons in a pending suit. Consequently, the application lacked merit both substantively and procedurally and was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The chamber summons dated 9th December, 2008 is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.