[2018] KEELC 4155 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the suit property, Kisumu/Reru/3777, and that his title is protected under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act unless successfully challenged. The Defendant's claim to the land was not supported by any evidence of a favorable judgment in her...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 4155 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Peterlis Nyagudi Obego; Defendant: Jane Atieno Okoth
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 313 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's application for temporary injunction allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Temporary Injunctions, Registered Land Title, Proprietary Rights, Quiet Possession
- 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
Peterlis Nyagudi Obego
Plaintiff
Jane Atieno Okoth
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Plaintiff has established a prima facie case with a probability of success for a temporary injunction to issue at this stage.
- 2 Who should bear the costs of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the suit property, Kisumu/Reru/3777, and that his title is protected under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act unless successfully challenged. The Defendant's claim to the land was not supported by any evidence of a favorable judgment in her separate suit. The court held that it would be fair and just to restrain the Defendant from undertaking any development or cultivation on the land pending the hearing and determination of the main suit, to preserve the status quo and prevent alteration of the property. Accordingly, the Plaintiff established a prima facie case for the grant of a temporary injunction.
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's application for temporary injunction allowed.
Orders
- An order of temporary injunction is issued restraining the Defendant by herself, her servants, agents and proxies from developing or cultivating any portion of land parcel Kisumu/Reru/3777 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
- Costs be in the course.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
44 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KISUMU
ELC CASE NO.313 OF 2016
PETERLIS NYAGUDI OBEGO ...................... PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JANE ATIENO OKOTH ................................. DEFENDANT
RULING
1. Peterlis Nyagudi Obego, the Plaintiff, seeks vide the notice of motion dated 28th November 2016, for temporary order of injunction restraining Jane Atieno Okoth, the Defendant, “by herself or her servants, or proxies or any of them from entering, remaining on, developing, occupying, cultivating any crops on or using any portion of land parcel No. Kisumu/Reru/3777, measuring or estimated to measure 0. 19 Ha or doing anything else which may restrict,, curtail, diminish or interfere with the Plaintiff’s quiet possession, use and enjoyment of the said land parcel No. Kisumu/Reru/3777, measuring or estimated to measure 0. 19 ha, pending the hearing and final determination of this suit.” The application is based on the four (4) grounds on its face and surrounded by the affidavit sworn by the Plaintiff on the 28th November 2016.
2. The application is opposed by the Defendant through her replying affidavit sworn on the 19th June 2017.
3. That on the 20th June 2017, the court gave directions on filing and exchanging written submissions in 30 days. The counsel for the Plaintiff filed their written submissions dated 28th June 2017. The matter was then mentioned on 5th December 2017, and the submissions filed by counsel for the Defendant on 4th December 2017 dated 30th November 2017, were expunged from the record of the court on application of the Plaintiff’s counsel for being filed outside the time set on 20th June 2017.
4. The following are the issues for the court’s determination;
a) Whether the Plaintiff has established a prima facie case with a probability of success for temporary injunction to issue at this stage.
b) Who pays the costs.
5. The court has carefully considered the grounds on the notice of motion, affidavit evidence, submissions by counsel for the Plaintiff and concluded as follows;
a) That the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the suit property, Kisumu/Reru/3777, since 14th May 2014 as confirmed by the copy of the title deed attached to her supporting affidavit. That accordingly and under the provision of Section 26 of Land Registration Act No.6 of 2012,this court is obligated to take him as the indefeasible and absolute owner of the said land until and unless his title is successfully challenged.
b) That the Plaintiff reportedly bought the land from Benjamin Owesi Onyango, who is the same person the Defendant claim sold a portion of land Kisumu/Reru/1556 to her late husband, Naftali Okoth Oidho, on the 25th February 1999. That even though the Defendant claims that the portion of land bought by her late husband “constitutes Kisumu/Reru/3777”, and that she had commenced suit through originating summons, being Kisumu ELC 8 of 2017 to be declared and registered as the proprietor, there is no confirmation as to whether that suit has been heard and or decided in her favour.
c) That it is only fair and just that any development activities of a permanent nature or likely to alter the value of the suit land that may have been commenced from 2014 by the Defendant be stopped pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
6. That flowing from the foregoing, the court finds merit in the Plaintiff’s notice of motion dated 28th November 2016 and is allowed in the following terms;
a) That an order of temporary injunction is hereby issued restraining the Defendant by herself, her servants, agents and proxies from developing or cultivating any portion of land parcel Kisumu/Reru/3777 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
b) The costs be in the course
Orders accordingly.
S.M. KIBUNJA
ENVIRONMENT & LAND – JUDGE
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2018
In presence of;
Plaintiff Absent
Defendant Absent
Counsel Mr. Orengo for the Plaintiff
Mr. Ochieng for the Defendant
S.M. KIBUNJA
ENVIRONMENT & LAND – JUDGE
14/3/2018
14/3/2018
S.M. Kibunja Judge
Joane Court Assistant
Defendant present
Mr. Orengo for the Plaintiff/applicant
Mr. Ochieng for the Defendant/Respondent
Court: the ruling dated and delivered in open court in the
presence of the Defendant and her counsel Mr. Ochieng Plus Mr.
Orengo for the Plaintiff.
S.M. KIBUNJA
ENVIRONMENT & LAND – JUDGE
14/3/2018