[2022] KEELC 14471 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff is the registered owner of the suit land and that the defendant, having not opposed the application, failed to rebut the plaintiff's evidence of ownership and encroachment. The plaintiff established a prima facie case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The application...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 14471 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Jacob Letia Ole Kepury; Defendant: Enkoi Leloi Dema
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E60 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Interlocutory injunction granted.
- Judges
- MN Gicheru
- Legal Topics
- Injunctions, Land Ownership, Trespass, Title Deeds
- 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
Jacob Letia Ole Kepury
Plaintiff
Enkoi Leloi Dema
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from encroaching, erecting structures, trespassing or interfering with L.R. No. Kajiado/Osilalei/77.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case for the grant of an injunction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff is the registered owner of the suit land and that the defendant, having not opposed the application, failed to rebut the plaintiff's evidence of ownership and encroachment. The plaintiff established a prima facie case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The application was therefore allowed as prayed, restraining the defendant from encroaching, erecting structures, trespassing, or interfering with the plaintiff's land pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Interlocutory injunction granted.
Orders
- The respondent, his agents, servants, employees and/or nominees are restrained by an order of injunction from encroaching, erecting structures, trespassing on or in any way interfering with the plaintiff’s L.R. No. Kajiado/Osilalei/77, suit land, pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
- Costs in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Ole Kepury v Dema (Environment & Land Case E60 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 14471 (KLR) (31 October 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELC 14471 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
Environment & Land Case E60 of 2021
MN Gicheru, J
October 31, 2022
Between
Jacob Letia Ole Kepury
Plaintiff
and
Enkoi Leloi Dema
Defendant
Ruling
1. This ruling is on the notice of motion dated 6/9/2021. The said motion is brought under Section 1A and 63 of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 40, Rules 1, 2 and 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 and all other enabling provision of the law.
2. The main prayer in the application is that the Respondent, his agents, servants, employees and/or nominees be restrained by an order of injunction from encroaching, erecting structures, trespassing on or in any way interfering with the Plaintiff’s L.R. No. Kajiado/Osilalei/77, suit land.
3. The application is supported by six grounds and an affidavit the gist of which is as follows. The Plaintiff is the registered owner of the suit land. He has not allowed the Respondent Enkoi Leloi Dema to occupy the land.The Defendant has nonetheless encroached on the Plaintiff’s land and occupied part of it. The Plaintiff has attempted to evict the Defendant to no avail. Instead, the Defendant has threatened the Plaintiff if he dares to reclaim his property.It is for the above reasons that he has filed this suit and the current application.
4. Annexed to the supporting affidavit is a copy of the title deed for the suit land. Even though it is deposed that a copy of the certificate of official search was also annexed, this record shows otherwise as there is no such document.
5. There is an affidavit of service dated October 3, 2022 in which the deponent says that he served the Respondent with a hearing notice on 14/9/2022 at Bissil.The application is unopposed because the Defendant did not file a replying affidavit or any other pleading.
6. Since the notice of motion is unopposed and it has merit, I allow it in terms of prayer (c).
Costs in the cause.
DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT KAJIADO THIS 31STDAY OF OCTOBER, 2022. M.N. GICHERUJUDGE