[2025] KEELC 3162 (KLR)

[2025] KEELC 3162 (KLR)

The court found that, although the truth of the plaintiffs' allegations could not be determined at the interlocutory stage, it was necessary to preserve the suit property pending the hearing and determination of the main suit. The application was unopposed, and the plaintiffs had demonstrated sufficient grounds for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEELC 3162 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kaunda Matoke; Plaintiff: Kephas Matoke; Defendant: Daniel Oguta Matoke; Defendant: Land Registrar, Kisii; Defendant: The Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case E007 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction and Inhibition Application
Outcome
interlocutory injunction and inhibition granted; costs in the cause
Judges
M Sila
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Inhibition Orders, Fraudulent Land Transfer, Rectification of Register
Source Language
en
Land and Property Injunctions Inhibition Orders Fraudulent Land Transfer Rectification of Register

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

Kaunda Matoke

Plaintiff

Kephas Matoke

Plaintiff

Daniel Oguta Matoke

Defendant

Land Registrar, Kisii

Defendant

The Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction and Inhibition Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have established a prima facie case to warrant an injunction restraining the 1st defendant from dealing with the suit land.
  2. 2 Whether an order of inhibition should issue to preserve the subject matter pending hearing and determination of the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, although the truth of the plaintiffs' allegations could not be determined at the interlocutory stage, it was necessary to preserve the suit property pending the hearing and determination of the main suit. The application was unopposed, and the plaintiffs had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the grant of an inhibition and an injunction to maintain the status quo. The orders sought were therefore granted to prevent any dealings with the land parcel Bassi/Bondonya/794 until the case is concluded.

Court Disposition

interlocutory injunction and inhibition granted; costs in the cause

Orders

  • An order of inhibition is issued prohibiting the registration of any disposition in the register of land parcel Bassi/Bondonya/794.
  • The 1st defendant is barred by injunction from selling, charging, leasing, or otherwise dealing with land parcel Bassi/Bondonya/794.