[2020] KEELC 2474 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 2474 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case as the registered proprietor of the land in question, with evidence that the demolished structures were within the applicant's property and not on a road reserve. The applicant had previously obtained a court injunction which was allegedly...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 2474 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Pius Watene D Maina (suing for and on behalf of the Baptist Convention of Kenya); Respondent: Director General Kenya Urban Roads Authority; Respondent: Hyperteck Contractors & Equipment Limited; Respondent: Kenya Power & Lighting Company; Respondent: Inspector General of Police; Respondent: OCS Chuka Police Station; Respondent: Honourable Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 3 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Urgent Application for Injunction
Outcome
Application certified urgent; temporary injunction and security orders granted; inter partes hearing scheduled.
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Compulsory Acquisition, Land Ownership, Demolition of Structures
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctive Relief Compulsory Acquisition Land Ownership Demolition of Structures

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pius Watene D Maina (suing for and on behalf of the Baptist Convention of Kenya)

Applicant

Director General Kenya Urban Roads Authority

Respondent

Hyperteck Contractors & Equipment Limited

Respondent

Kenya Power & Lighting Company

Respondent

Inspector General of Police

Respondent

OCS Chuka Police Station

Respondent

Honourable Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Urgent Application for Injunction

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from entering or occupying LR KARINGANI/NDAGANI/594 pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the court should adopt the survey report and beacons as the official boundary between the applicant's land and the Moi Girls road.
  3. 3 Whether the OCS Chuka Police Station should provide security for enforcement of the court orders.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case as the registered proprietor of the land in question, with evidence that the demolished structures were within the applicant's property and not on a road reserve. The applicant had previously obtained a court injunction which was allegedly disregarded by the respondents, resulting in demolition and loss. The court held that the applicant faced irreparable harm that could not be adequately compensated by damages, particularly given the nature of the applicant as a church and the reputational harm involved. The balance of convenience favored the applicant, as no party would be prejudiced by the grant of the orders....

Court Disposition

Application certified urgent; temporary injunction and security orders granted; inter partes hearing scheduled.

Orders

  • Matter certified urgent.
  • A temporary injunction is issued restraining the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants, their agents, servants, or anyone acting on their behalf from entering or occupying LR KARINGANI/NDAGANI/594 pending inter partes hearing and determination.