[2017] KEELC 259 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 259 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff/applicant had demonstrated that she has been in occupation of the suit land since 2010 and that there was apprehension of interference by the defendant. The defendant did not file any response to the application. Applying the principles for grant of interlocutory injunctions, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 259 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Plisila Kathambi; Defendant: Sarah Kaguri M’Rimberia
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 75 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
Outcome
interlocutory injunction granted for one year; costs in the cause
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Land Ownership Disputes, Possession and Occupation, Title Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Injunctive Relief Land Ownership Disputes Possession and Occupation Title Disputes

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plisila Kathambi

Plaintiff

Sarah Kaguri M’Rimberia

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Injunction Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with her occupation and ownership of Land Parcel Title Number NYAKI/CHUGU/943 pending determination of the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a prima facie case with a probability of success to warrant the grant of an injunction.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience tilts in favour of the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff/applicant had demonstrated that she has been in occupation of the suit land since 2010 and that there was apprehension of interference by the defendant. The defendant did not file any response to the application. Applying the principles for grant of interlocutory injunctions, the court held that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favoured maintaining the status quo. Consequently, the court granted the injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's occupation and ownership of Land Parcel Title Number NYAKI/CHUGU/943 for a period of one year, pending further orders or...

Court Disposition

interlocutory injunction granted for one year; costs in the cause

Orders

  • An injunction is issued restraining the defendant, her servants, agents, employees or anyone acting on her behalf from building, trespassing, cultivating upon or in any other way interfering with the plaintiff’s rights of occupation or from transferring, selling or subdividing, or evicting the plaintiff, or in any...
  • Costs shall be in the cause.