[1995] KECA 117 (KLR)
The court held that the applicant had not demonstrated any legal basis for restraining the 1st respondent from disposing of his property. The court emphasized that ownership confers the right to deal with property as one wishes, and there is no statutory or common law obligation for a person to preserve property for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1995] KECA 117 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Mary Wahito Mbugua; Respondent: Peter Mbugua Njuhigu; Respondent: George Ruhohi Mbugua; Respondent: James Njuhigu Mbugua; Respondent: Mary Kiria Kiarie; Respondent: Mary Wambui Mbugua
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 189 of 1995
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Interlocutory Injunction Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- JM Gachuhi, AM Akiwumi
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Injunctions, Right of Inheritance, Ownership of Land, Disposal 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
Mary Wahito Mbugua
Applicant
Peter Mbugua Njuhigu
Respondent
George Ruhohi Mbugua
Respondent
James Njuhigu Mbugua
Respondent
Mary Kiria Kiarie
Respondent
Mary Wambui Mbugua
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Interlocutory Injunction Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interlocutory injunction to restrain the 1st respondent from transferring land pending determination of her inheritance claim.
- 2 Whether a court can prevent a registered owner from disposing of his property to preserve alleged inheritance rights of children.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the applicant had not demonstrated any legal basis for restraining the 1st respondent from disposing of his property. The court emphasized that ownership confers the right to deal with property as one wishes, and there is no statutory or common law obligation for a person to preserve property for the benefit of potential heirs. The application was found to be frivolous, lacking an arguable appeal, and was dismissed with costs to the respondents.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application is dismissed with costs to the respondents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
CORAM: GACHUHI, OMOLO & AKIWUMI, JJ.A.
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 189 OF 1995
BETWEEN
MARY WAHITO MBUGUA ............................... APPLICANT
AND
PETER MBUGUA NJUHIGU
GEORGE RUHOHI MBUGUA
JAMES NJUHIGU MBUGUA
MARY KIRIA KIARIE
MARY WAMBUI MBUGUA ............................... RESPONDENTS
(Application for interlocutory injunction from the orders of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Bosire J) dated 19th June, 1995
in H.C.C.C. NO. 1370 OF 1995) ****************
RULING OF THE COURT
The applicant Mary Wahito Mbugua is the daughter of the 1st respondent Peter Mbugua Njuhiga. The 1st respondent is or at some stage was the registered owner of various pieces of land in Kiambu District. The applicant wants us to stop her father from transferring those lands and her claim is apparently brought on the basis that as a daughter of the respondent she, like the other children entitled to inherit land from the father and that the court should prevent her alleged right to inheritance being rendered nugatory in the event that the 1st respondent is allowed to dispose of the lands.We think this application is totally frivolous; like the Judge of the High Court, we very much doubt whether there would be any legal basis upon which court can prevent a man from using that which is admittedly his own in the manner he pleases. We are not even aware that there is a law which requires a man to preserve his property so that his children can exercise their alleged right of inheritance in the event of the man dying. What we are in fact saying is that the applicant has not shown to us that she has an arguable appeal.
We have very grave doubts on the legal basis of her claims.
That being our view of the matter this application fails and we order that it be dismissed with costs to the respondents.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 19th day of October, 1995.
J. M. GACHUHI
...........................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
R. S. C. OMOLO
.............................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A. M. AKIWUMI
............................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR