[2024] KEELC 1486 (KLR)
The court declined to grant the restraining orders sought by the appellant, finding that the application dated 23.2.2024 was substantially similar to a previous application and that granting further interlocutory orders would unnecessarily complicate the dispute, especially as the trial court was still handling...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 1486 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Stephen Maburo Ngonjo & 47 others; Respondent: Paul Irungu Maina; Respondent: Francis Makeria Wanjiru; Respondent: Samuel Kariuki Maina; Respondent: Nairobi City County
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application and Directions for Hearing of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application marked as spent; appeal admitted for hearing with directions for written submissions.
- Judges
- LN Mbugua
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Injunctions, Status Quo Orders, Appeal Admission, Written Submissions, Contempt Proceedings
- 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
Stephen Maburo Ngonjo & 47 others
Appellant
Paul Irungu Maina
Respondent
Francis Makeria Wanjiru
Respondent
Samuel Kariuki Maina
Respondent
Nairobi City County
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application and Directions for Hearing of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should grant restraining orders against interference with the suit property pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the application dated 23.2.2024 is substantially similar to the previous application dated 23.11.2023.
- 3 Whether granting interlocutory orders would prejudice the substantive hearing of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to grant the restraining orders sought by the appellant, finding that the application dated 23.2.2024 was substantially similar to a previous application and that granting further interlocutory orders would unnecessarily complicate the dispute, especially as the trial court was still handling related contempt proceedings. The court emphasized the need to focus on the substantive appeal and directed that the application be marked as spent. Directions were issued for the expeditious hearing of the appeal by way of written submissions, with strict timelines for filing and service, and a warning that documents filed outside the timelines would be expunged.
Court Disposition
Application marked as spent; appeal admitted for hearing with directions for written submissions.
Orders
- The application dated 23.2.2024 is marked as spent.
- The appeal is admitted for hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
Ngonjo & 47 others v Maina & 3 others (Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 1486 (KLR) (12 March 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 1486 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2023
LN Mbugua, J
March 12, 2024
Between
Stephen Maburo Ngonjo & 47 others
Appellant
and
Paul Irungu Maina
1st Respondent
Francis Makeria Wanjiru
2nd Respondent
Samuel Kariuki Maina
3rd Respondent
Nairobi City County
4th Respondent
Ruling
1. I have considered the issues raised before this court today. In particular the court has considered the application made by the appellant that an order be given for all parties to be restrained from interfering with the suit property.
2. I have taken into account the ruling delivered by this court today where the court has given directions that focus should be on determination of the substantive appeal and not interlocutory applications.
3. I have also taken into account that the appellant’s application dated 23. 2.2024 is more or less similar to the one dated 23. 11. 2023 as in both instances, the appellant is seeking restraining orders.
4. I have also keenly perused the ruling of the trial court dated 15. 8.2023 where the issues there in relates to orders of maintenance of status quo; where the current plaintiff is facing contempt proceedings.
5. Granting any orders at this stage would only convolute the dispute further noting that the matter is still active before the trial court.
6. In the circumstances, I proceed to give directions as follows:1. The application dated 23. 2.2024 is marked as SPENT in lieu of hearing the appeal.2. The Appeal is hereby admitted for hearing.3. The Appeal is to be heard by way of written submissions.4. The appellant is to file/serve written submissions within 7 days (by 19. 3.2024).5. The Respondents to file/serve written submissions by 26. 3.2024. 6.Parties are directed to file their Affidavits of Service in the portal.7. Judgment on 8. 4.2024. 8.Parties are at liberty to also file/serve submissions on the other pending applications (dated 18. 8.2023 and 23. 11. 2023) but the pronouncement of the decision there of will be made in the body of the judgment.9. Any documents filed or served outside the given timelines shall stand as expunged.10. Appellant to effect today’s directions upon 4th Respondent by close of business tomorrow (13. 3.2024).
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS.LUCY N. MBUGUAJUDGEIn the presence of:-Kuria for AppellantManyanyi for 1st – 4th RespondentM/s Kipedi for the 4th RespondentCourt assistant: Judith