[2015] KEELC 53 (KLR)

[2015] KEELC 53 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant, as the legal representative of the estate of Linus Juma Ondatto, had established a prima facie case with a likelihood of success. The evidence showed that the applicant's late husband purchased the suit property in 1993, and although a subsequent sale agreement was entered into...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEELC 53 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Mary Muriza Ondatto (suing as the legal representative of the estate of Linus Juma Ondatto); Respondent: District Lands Adjudication and Settlement Officer, Kilifi; Respondent: Chief Registrar of Lands; Respondent: Said T. Sheik Said
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Constitutional Petition 8 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Land Adjudication, Injunctions, Fraudulent Transfer, Title Registration
Source Language
en
Land and Property Land Adjudication Injunctions Fraudulent Transfer Title Registration

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Muriza Ondatto (suing as the legal representative of the estate of Linus Juma Ondatto)

Applicant

District Lands Adjudication and Settlement Officer, Kilifi

Respondent

Chief Registrar of Lands

Respondent

Said T. Sheik Said

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner has established a prima facie case to warrant the grant of a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from dealing with Kawala “B” Adjudication Section Plot No. 118.
  2. 2 Whether the actions of the respondents in registering the 3rd respondent as proprietor were unlawful or fraudulent.
  3. 3 Whether the petitioner would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant, as the legal representative of the estate of Linus Juma Ondatto, had established a prima facie case with a likelihood of success. The evidence showed that the applicant's late husband purchased the suit property in 1993, and although a subsequent sale agreement was entered into with Cyril Muhanji Ondatto, the circumstances surrounding that transaction were questionable. The Land Adjudication Committee's decision in favour of Cyril was challenged by the applicant, and there was an undated and unsigned decision from the Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer allowing the applicant's objection. The authenticity of this decision was disputed, but the...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • A temporary order of injunction is issued restraining the 3rd respondent and any person acting on his behalf from alienating, selling, transferring, charging, mortgaging, entering into, trespassing unto, or dealing in any way with Kawala “B” Adjudication Section Plot No. 118 pending inter partes hearing.
  • An order of injunction is issued restraining the 1st and 2nd respondents and any person acting on their behalf from issuing title deed or any other proprietorship documents or dealing in any way with Kawala “B” Adjudication Section Plot No. 118 pending hearing and determination of the petition.