[2009] KEHC 2600 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 2600 (KLR)

The court declined to grant the orders sought for eviction and possession because the applicant failed to provide sufficient material to persuade the court to exercise its discretion in his favour. The court also noted procedural concerns, including the lack of supporting proceedings for the attached order and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 2600 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Michael George Kasia Kwali; Defendant: Peninah Musangi Mulwa
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 1301 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Eviction and Possession
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JL Osiemo
Legal Topics
Eviction Orders, Possession of Land, Execution of Decree
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Eviction Orders Possession of Land Execution of Decree

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael George Kasia Kwali

Plaintiff

Peninah Musangi Mulwa

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Eviction and Possession

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to orders for eviction and possession of LR No YATTAB2/KANGONDE/116.
  2. 2 Whether sufficient material has been placed before the court to warrant the exercise of discretion in favour of the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to grant the orders sought for eviction and possession because the applicant failed to provide sufficient material to persuade the court to exercise its discretion in his favour. The court also noted procedural concerns, including the lack of supporting proceedings for the attached order and the unexplained choice of filing in Nairobi instead of the more appropriate Machakos High Court, given the location of the suit property and the parties involved. As a result, the application was dismissed and no order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for eviction and possession is declined.
  • No order as to costs.