[2016] KEELC 47 (KLR)

[2016] KEELC 47 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff is in possession of the disputed property and has raised serious allegations of fraud and lack of proper consent in the transfer of the land to the 1st and 2nd defendants. There is also a counterclaim that the deceased vendor may not have had legal authority to sell the property,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEELC 47 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Paul Wambugu Ndirangu; Defendant: Andrew Peter Ndirici; Defendant: Purity Wangui Kuria; Defendant: Giriama Central Association & Property Management Ltd; Defendant: Wangeci Ndumo; Defendant: County Land Registrar, Kilifi County; Defendant: The Hon. Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 228 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition
Outcome
Application allowed; order of inhibition granted.
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Land Title Disputes, Fraudulent Transfer, Succession and Estate, Injunctive Relief
Source Language
en
Land and Property Land Title Disputes Fraudulent Transfer Succession and Estate Injunctive Relief

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Wambugu Ndirangu

Plaintiff

Andrew Peter Ndirici

Defendant

Purity Wangui Kuria

Defendant

Giriama Central Association & Property Management Ltd

Defendant

Wangeci Ndumo

Defendant

County Land Registrar, Kilifi County

Defendant

The Hon. Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an order of inhibition restraining dealings with Kilifi/Mtwapa/4270, 4271, and 4272 pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the transfers and registrations of the suit property were fraudulent or invalid due to lack of proper consent or legal capacity.
  3. 3 Whether the deceased vendor had legal authority to sell the suit property.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff is in possession of the disputed property and has raised serious allegations of fraud and lack of proper consent in the transfer of the land to the 1st and 2nd defendants. There is also a counterclaim that the deceased vendor may not have had legal authority to sell the property, as succession for the previous registered owner had not been completed. Given these unresolved issues and the risk of further dealings prejudicing the parties' rights, the court held it is just and prudent to issue an order of inhibition to preserve the status quo pending full hearing and determination of the suit. The court was not satisfied that the defendants had adequately...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; order of inhibition granted.

Orders

  • A general inhibition is issued to inhibit registration of any dealings with parcel of land known as Kilifi/Mtwapa/4270, 4271 and 4272, all subdivisions created from plot Kilifi/Mtwapa 1344, until the hearing and determination of this suit.
  • The costs of the application to await the outcome of the suit.