[2011] KEHC 3758 (KLR)
The court found that the defendant/applicant had established a prima facie case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The applicant demonstrated registered ownership of the disputed land and provided evidence of a prior court judgment bequeathing the land to him. The plaintiff/respondent did not oppose the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 3758 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Nathan Wanjala Muindi; Defendant: Julius Wepukhulu Muindi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 63 of 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- application for interlocutory injunction allowed
- Judges
- FN Muchemi
- Legal Topics
- Injunctive Relief, Land Ownership Disputes, Quiet Possession, Prima Facie Case
- 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
Nathan Wanjala Muindi
Plaintiff
Julius Wepukhulu Muindi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the plaintiff from interfering with land parcel no. Kimilili/Sikhendu/456 pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case for the grant of an injunction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the defendant/applicant had established a prima facie case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The applicant demonstrated registered ownership of the disputed land and provided evidence of a prior court judgment bequeathing the land to him. The plaintiff/respondent did not oppose the application despite being served. The court was satisfied that the requirements for an injunction as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown had been met, and therefore allowed the application as prayed, restraining the plaintiff from interfering with the defendant's quiet possession of the land pending determination of the suit.
Court Disposition
application for interlocutory injunction allowed
Orders
- The plaintiff/respondent is restrained from entering, tilling, working, developing, or in any way interfering with the defendant's quiet possession of land parcel no. Kimilili/Sikhendu/456 until the hearing and determination of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLICOF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
AT BUNGOMA
CIVIL CASE NO.63 OF 2000
NATHAN WANJALA MUINDI::::::::::::::::::::::: PLAINTIFF
~VRS~
JULIUS WEPUKHULU MUINDI::::::::::::::::::::::: DEFENDANT
RULING
This is the Defendant’s application dated 1/02/2010 seeking for orders against the Plaintiff/Respondent to be restrained from entering, tilling, working or developing or in any way interfering with the Defendant’s quiet possession of land parcel no.Kimilili/Sikhendu/456 until the hearing and determination of the suit. The affidavit of Julius Wepukhulu Muindi supports the application.
The Applicant depones that he is the sole proprietor of land parcel no. Kimilili/Sikhendu/456 and annexes a copy of register. The land was bequeathed to him by the High Court, Kakamega in HCCC No.109/1987. The Plaintiff/Respondent claims a portion of the land and has invaded the land with both his sons. The Respondent if not restrained is likely to invade and plough the two acres he is claiming from the land. It is the Applicant’s prayer that status quo be maintained.
The Respondent was served with this application but did not oppose it. I have perused the supporting affidavit and the annexures thereto. I am satisfied that the Respondent has made up a prima facie case. Copy of judgment shows that the Respondent was given the land in question by the High Court Kakamega in HCCC No.109 of 1985 on the 23/04/1987. The copy of the register shows that the applicant is the registered owner of the land since 16/06/1987. It is my finding that the Plaintiff has satisfied the requirements for injunction as laid down in the case of GIELLA VRS CASSMAN BROWN. I find his application merited and I allow it as prayed.
……………………
F. N. MUCHEMI
JUDGE
Ruling dated and delivered in the presence of Mr. Khakula Junior for the applicant on the 10th March, 2011.
……………………….
F. N. MUCHEMI
JUDGE