[2016] KEHC 841 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs had established a well-grounded fear that the defendant intended to sell more of the ancestral land, which is registered in his name but alleged to be held in trust for the family. The defendant's explanation for previous sales was found untruthful and unconvincing. Given the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 841 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Mwiti Isaac Bitu; Plaintiff: Moses Gitonga Bitu; Plaintiff: Silas Thuranira Bitu; Plaintiff: Richard Michubu Bitu; Defendant: Bitu M'Ithiria
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 216 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition Order
- Outcome
- Application for inhibition order granted.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Trusts Over Land, Inhibition Orders, Family Land 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
Mwiti Isaac Bitu
Plaintiff
Moses Gitonga Bitu
Plaintiff
Silas Thuranira Bitu
Plaintiff
Richard Michubu Bitu
Plaintiff
Bitu M'Ithiria
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs have established a prima facie case for the grant of an inhibition order over the suit properties pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the defendant holds the suit land in trust for the plaintiffs and their family.
- 3 Whether there is a real risk of the defendant disposing of the suit land to the detriment of the plaintiffs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs had established a well-grounded fear that the defendant intended to sell more of the ancestral land, which is registered in his name but alleged to be held in trust for the family. The defendant's explanation for previous sales was found untruthful and unconvincing. Given the plaintiffs' long occupation and development of the land, and the risk of irreparable harm if the land were disposed of, the court determined that an inhibition order was necessary to preserve the subject matter of the suit pending its determination. The court therefore granted the inhibition order as sought in prayer 3 of the application.
Court Disposition
Application for inhibition order granted.
Orders
- An order of inhibition is to be registered against land parcel numbers ITHIMA/NTUNENE/3416, 3417, 3418, 3421, 3422, 3891 and 3892 pending the hearing of the suit.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND CASE. NO. 216 OF 2016
MWITI ISAAC BITU..................................................................1ST PLAINTIFF
MOSES GITONGA BITU.........................................................2ND PLAINTIFF
SILAS THURANIRA BITU........................................................3RD PALINTIFF
RICHARD MICHUBU BITU.....................................................4TH PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
BITU M'ITHIRIA...........................................................................DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
1. This application is dated 26th October, 2016 and seeks orders:-
1. That this Honourable Court be pleased to certify this application as of utmost urgency, hear the same ex-parte in the first instance and dispense with service thereof.
2. That an order of inhibition do issue against land parcel Nos. ITHIMA/NTUNENE/ 3416, 3417, 3418, 3421, 3422, 3891 and 3892 pending the hearing and determination of this application.
3. That an order of inhibition do issue against land parcel numbers ITHIMA/NTUNENE/ 3416, 3417,3418, 3421, 3422, 3891 and 3892 pending the hearing of the suit.
4. Costs of this application be provided for.
2. The application is buttressed by the Supporting Affidavit of Mwiti Isaac Bitu and has the following grounds:-
I. That the suit land herein is a family land registered in the names of the defendant to hold in trust for the family.
II. That the defendant is in the process of disposing the entire family lands at the detriment of the plaintiffs and their family.
III. That the defendant had other parcels of lands and sold 3 of them.
IV. That the plaintiffs has (sic) extensively developed the suit lands having lived there for over 20 years, and have built their homes, and they live with their families on the suit land.
V. That if the suit lands are not preserved by an order of this court, the defendant may dispose the same anytime now hence impoverishing the plaintiffs and rendering them and their families landless and destitute.
VI. That this suit will be rendered nugatory if the orders sought herein are not granted.
3. During interpartes hearing, the 1st Plaintiff told the Court that their father had sold 3 parcels of land out of their ancestral land and they feared that he would sell the remaining ancestral land.
4. The Defendant/ Respondent told the Court that he sold his small parcels of land to exchange with a bigger portion of land. He, however, told the Court that he could not remember the name of the person he exchanged his small portions of land with a bigger parcel of land.
5. The Respondent is not truthful.
6. I find that the fear expressed by the Plaintiffs that the defendant intended to sell more of their ancestral land was well grounded.
7. In the circumstances, prayer 3 is granted with the effect that it is ordered that an order of Inhibition be registered against land parcel numbers ITHIMA/NTUNENE/3416,3417,3418,3421,3422,3891 and 3892.
8. Costs shall be in the cause.
9. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
CC: Daniel/James
Mwitu Isaac Bitu -1st Plaintiff /Applicant
Moses Gitonga Bitu- 2nd Plaintiff/Applicant
Richard Michubu Bitu- 4th Plaintiff/Applicant
Bitu M' Ithiria -Defendant/Respondent
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE