[2025] KEELC 4250 (KLR)
The court determined that, in order to preserve the substratum of the suit and to meet the ends of justice, it was necessary to issue interim orders maintaining the status quo on the suit property pending the hearing and determination of the applications for review and enforcement. The court directed the parties to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELC 4250 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Rael Mitei; Defendant: Ishmael Kipkorir Arap Kosgei; Applicant: Kirwa Kurgat Aziz; Applicant: Ali Kipngetich Kurgat; Applicant: Faraj Kiplimo Kurgat; Applicant: Ibrahim Kiprop Kurgat
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 14 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications for Security and Review of Orders
- Outcome
- Interim orders granted; status quo to be maintained; directions for filing and service of submissions; police to oversee enforcement.
- Judges
- GMA Ongondo
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Orders, Status Quo Orders, Review of Decree, Police Enforcement, Estate Administration
- 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
Rael Mitei
Plaintiff
Ishmael Kipkorir Arap Kosgei
Defendant
Kirwa Kurgat Aziz
Applicant
Ali Kipngetich Kurgat
Applicant
Faraj Kiplimo Kurgat
Applicant
Ibrahim Kiprop Kurgat
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications for Security and Review of Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Officer Commanding Station should provide security for the implementation of court orders dated 30th January 2023.
- 2 Whether the orders/decree dated 30th January 2023 should be reviewed, varied, or set aside as sought by the administrators of the estate.
- 3 Whether a status quo order should be issued to preserve the subject matter pending determination of the applications.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that, in order to preserve the substratum of the suit and to meet the ends of justice, it was necessary to issue interim orders maintaining the status quo on the suit property pending the hearing and determination of the applications for review and enforcement. The court directed the parties to file and serve responses and submissions within specified timelines and ordered that the applicants respect the portion of land occupied by the plaintiff, prohibiting any destruction or alienation of the land or crops thereon. The Officer Commanding Chepsonoi/Kaimosi Police Station was directed to oversee the implementation of the interim orders. The court's reasoning was...
Court Disposition
Interim orders granted; status quo to be maintained; directions for filing and service of submissions; police to oversee enforcement.
Orders
- Plaintiff/respondent to file and serve response to the second application within seven days.
- Applicants' counsel to file and serve any rejoinder and submissions within seven days upon service of the response.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Mitei v Kosgei (Environment & Land Case 14 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 4250 (KLR) (4 June 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 4250 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet
Environment & Land Case 14 of 2022
GMA Ongondo, J
June 4, 2025
Between
Rael Mitei
Plaintiff
and
Ishmael Kipkorir Arap Kosgei
Defendant
Ruling
1. By a Notice of Motion dated 17th January 2025 (The first application herein), the applicant/plaintiff through Rotich, Langat and Partners Advocates is seeking an order that the Officer Commanding Station Kapsabet to provide security during the implementation of orders of the court dated 30th January 2023 herein.
2. In the Notice of Motion dated 29th May 2025 (The second application herein), the applicants namely Kirwa Kurgat Aziz, Ali Kipngetich Kurgat, Faraj Kiplimo Kurgat and Ibrahim Kiprop Kurgat (as admininistrators of the Estate of Rashid Kipkurgat Too alias Rashid Kipkurgat Too-Deceased) through Kipkosigei Choge and Company Advocates, have sought inter alia, review, variation and setting aside of the orders/ decree given and dated the 30th day of January 2023.
3. It worth to note that Judgment was entered herein on 30th January 2023 and it is applicable in Kapsabet ELCC NO. 11 of 2022 as ordered by the court on the said date.
4. I have heard Mr Rotich learned counsel for the plaintiff and Mr Sang leaned counsel for the applicants on the two applications. It is common ground that the two applications be allowed in part by way of an order of status quo to sustain the substratum of the suit pending the outcome of the applications; see Ogada-vs-Mollin (2009) eKLR.
5. In the premises and to meet the ends of justice, it is hereby ordered and directed that;a.The plaintiff/respondent’s counsel duly served with the second application, to file and serve response to it within the next seven days from this date.b.The applicants’ counsel to file and serve any rejoinder and submissions on the applications within seven days upon service of the response as the applications be heard by written submissions.c.The respondent’s counsel to file and serve submissions on the applications within seven days upon service of the submissions by respondent.d.The applicants shall respect the portion of land occupied by the plaintiff in LR No.Nandi/Kapkangani/2XX7 being a sub division of LR NO. Nandi/Kapkangani/ 5X5 and in particular, they shall not uproot and or destroy maize planted thereon or transfer or alienate a portion thereof pending the hearing and determination of the two applications.e.The officer Commanding Chepsonoi/Kaimosi Police Station to oversee the implementation of the interim orders herein.
6. Further directions on both applications set for 24th July 2025.
7. It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT KAPSABET THIS 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2025G M A ONGONDOJUDGEPRESENTMr k. Rotich learned counsel for plaintiff/respondentMr D. Sang instructed by Mr K Choge learned counsel for the applicantMr Walter, court assistant