[2025] KEELC 3614 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated a prima facie case for the preservation of the suit land, having been in continuous and uninterrupted occupation since 1999 and asserting a claim for adverse possession. The respondents, despite being served, did not oppose the application. The court held that it...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELC 3614 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Isaac Waweru Mwaura; Defendant: Francis Mwai Muriithi; Defendant: Peter Ndungu Muriithi; Defendant: Monica Wanjiru Muriithi; Defendant: Jane Muthoni Muriithi; Defendant: Patrick Muiruri Muriithi; Defendant: John Muiruri Muriithi; Defendant: Margaret Wanjiku Muriithi; Defendant: Jackson Nduati Muriithi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Muranga
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E021 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Ruling on Interim Orders Pending Hearing and Determination of Suit
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Status quo and inhibition orders granted pending hearing and determination of the suit.
- Judges
- MN Gicheru
- Legal Topics
- Status Quo Orders, Adverse Possession, Interlocutory Injunctions, Land Registration, Succession Disputes
- 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
Isaac Waweru Mwaura
Plaintiff
Francis Mwai Muriithi
Defendant
Peter Ndungu Muriithi
Defendant
Monica Wanjiru Muriithi
Defendant
Jane Muthoni Muriithi
Defendant
Patrick Muiruri Muriithi
Defendant
John Muiruri Muriithi
Defendant
Margaret Wanjiku Muriithi
Defendant
Jackson Nduati Muriithi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Ruling on Interim Orders Pending Hearing and Determination of Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the status quo on the suit land should be maintained pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether an order of inhibition should be issued to prohibit dealings with the suit land until the suit is determined.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated a prima facie case for the preservation of the suit land, having been in continuous and uninterrupted occupation since 1999 and asserting a claim for adverse possession. The respondents, despite being served, did not oppose the application. The court held that it was fair and just to maintain the status quo and issue an order of inhibition to prevent any dealings with the land pending the hearing and determination of the suit. This would ensure that the substratum of the dispute remains intact and that the applicant's claim is not rendered nugatory by any intervening actions by the respondents.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Status quo and inhibition orders granted pending hearing and determination of the suit.
Orders
- An order of inhibition is issued prohibiting any dealings with L.R. No Mitubiri/Wempa/Block 1/737 until the hearing and determination of this suit.
- The status quo on the ground is to be maintained so that the applicant remains in occupation pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
Mwaura v Muriithi & 7 others (Environment & Land Case E021 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 3614 (KLR) (6 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 3614 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Muranga
Environment & Land Case E021 of 2023
MN Gicheru, J
May 6, 2025
Between
Isaac Waweru Mwaura
Plaintiff
and
Francis Mwai Muriithi
1st Defendant
Peter Ndungu Muriithi
2nd Defendant
Monica Wanjiru Muriithi
3rd Defendant
Jane Muthoni Muriithi
4th Defendant
Patrick Muiruri Muriithi
5th Defendant
John Muiruri Muriithi
6th Defendant
Margaret Wanjiku Muriithi
7th Defendant
Jackson Nduati Muriithi
8th Defendant
Ruling
1. This ruling is on the Notice of Motion dated 15-8-2024. The motion which is brought under Article 50 of the Constitution, Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, Section 68 of the Land Registration Act and all other enabling provisions of law is by the Applicant.
2. The said motion seeks the following Orders.3. An order that the status quo prevailing on the suit parcel, ie L.R. No Mitubiri/Wempa/Block 1/737 at the time of filing this case be maintained pending the hearing and determination of this case.4. Costs of this motion be provided for.
3. The motion is based on fourteen grounds and is supported by an affidavit of the Applicant dated 15/8/2024. The affidavit has one annexture.
4. In brief the Applicant urges as follows. One, he has been in possession of the suit land since the year 1999 when he was put in possession by the registered owner Muriithi Mwei. Two, on 29/1/2024, the Respondents obtained a confirmed grant in Kandara Succession cause NO. E387 of 2022 naming the 2nd Respondent as the sole beneficiary of the suit land. Three, even though the Respondents are aware of this suit, they have engaged the firm of Munene Law and Company advocates to deal with the suit land as the case pends. Four, if the order sought is not allowed, the suit land could be alienated before the conclusion of the suit. Five, the Applicant has been in continuous and uninterrupted occupation of the land since 1999 and has sued to be declared owner thereof through adverse possession. It is only fair that the status quo be maintained so that the substratum of the suit remains intact until the conclusion of the suit.
5. The motion though served is unopposed by the Respondents who have not file a reply affidavit or grounds of opposition.
6. I have carefully considered the motion in its entirety including the grounds, affidavit, written submissions and the record. I find that it is fair and just to order that the status quo be maintained. In this connections, I issue and order of inhibition prohibiting any dealings with the suit until the hearing and determination of this suit.Secondly, I order that the status quo on the ground be maintained so that the Applicant remains in occupation pending the hearing and determination of the suit.Costs in the cause.It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT MURANG'A THIS 6TH DAY OF MAY 2025M.N. GICHERUJUDGEDelivered online in the presence ofCourt Assistant – Mwangi NjonjoApplicant's Counsel - Miss WanjiruRespondent's Counsel – Absent