[2020] KEELC 871 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 871 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the suit land and had previously obtained eviction orders against the respondents. The 3rd respondent, having trespassed and subsequently lodged a caution on the land after the conclusion of the case, did so unlawfully and without merit. The caution...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 871 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Nicholus Ngavo Iminde; Respondent: Henry Shivoko; Respondent: Femina Ayuma Shivoko; Respondent: Timothy Shikanga Shivoko; Respondent: John Shivoko
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 330 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Removal of Caution
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
NA Matheka
Legal Topics
Removal of Caution, Land Registration, Eviction Orders, Trespass, Court Orders Enforcement
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Removal of Caution Land Registration Eviction Orders Trespass Court Orders Enforcement

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicholus Ngavo Iminde

Applicant

Henry Shivoko

Respondent

Femina Ayuma Shivoko

Respondent

Timothy Shikanga Shivoko

Respondent

John Shivoko

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Removal of Caution

  1. 1 Whether the caution lodged by the 3rd respondent against land parcel No. South/Kabras/Shamberere/3345 should be removed.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant, as the registered owner, is entitled to utilize the land free from encumbrances placed by the 3rd respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the suit land and had previously obtained eviction orders against the respondents. The 3rd respondent, having trespassed and subsequently lodged a caution on the land after the conclusion of the case, did so unlawfully and without merit. The caution served only to frustrate the applicant's right to utilize his property. As the application was unopposed and the applicant is entitled to enjoy the fruits of his judgment, the court held that the caution(s) lodged by the 3rd respondent should be removed to allow the applicant full use of his land.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The caution or cautions lodged against land parcel No. South/Kabras/Shamberere/3345 by the 3rd respondent prior to 5th November 2019 are hereby removed.
  • No orders as to costs.