[2020] KEELC 2289 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 2289 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case by demonstrating ownership of the disputed land, the existence of a court order restraining demolition, and the fact that the demolition was carried out in contempt of that order. The survey report confirmed that the demolished structures were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 2289 (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 2019
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Application / Interlocutory Application for Injunction and Related Orders
Outcome
Application allowed in part; temporary injunction and enforcement orders granted.
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Injunctive Relief, Land Ownership Disputes, Demolition of Structures
Source Language
english
Land and Property Civil Procedure Compulsory Acquisition Injunctive Relief Land Ownership Disputes 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 3 Authorities cited 5 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

Environment and Land Application / Interlocutory Application for Injunction and Related Orders

  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 demolition of the applicant's commercial building was unlawful and in contempt of court orders.
  3. 3 Whether the boundary between the applicant's land and the Moi Girls road has been properly determined by a survey report.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case by demonstrating ownership of the disputed land, the existence of a court order restraining demolition, and the fact that the demolition was carried out in contempt of that order. The survey report confirmed that the demolished structures were within the applicant's land and not on a road reserve. The applicant faced irreparable harm, as the property was used for church and community purposes, and monetary compensation would not suffice. The respondents, having been served, failed to appear or contest the application. The balance of convenience favored the applicant, and the court granted the temporary injunction and...

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; temporary injunction and enforcement orders granted.

Orders

  • 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 determination of the suit.
  • The OCS Chuka Police Station is ordered to provide security in enforcement of the court orders.