[2015] KEHC 6657 (KLR)
The court found that there was no suit pending before it, as the substantive matter had already been disposed of by a previous ruling that quashed the decision of the Machakos Land Disputes Tribunal. Since Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules only allows for the grant of temporary injunctions where a suit is...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 6657 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Machakos Land Disputes Tribunal; Respondent: Chief Magistrate’s Court Machakos; Applicant: Nelson Kilonzi; Respondent: Joseph Muasa Keli
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 233 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Injunction Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- CM Kariuki
- Legal Topics
- Injunctive Relief, Post Judgment Applications, Land Disputes
- 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
Republic
Applicant
Machakos Land Disputes Tribunal
Respondent
Chief Magistrate’s Court Machakos
Respondent
Nelson Kilonzi
Applicant
Joseph Muasa Keli
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court can grant injunctive relief after the substantive suit has been disposed of.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an injunction to restrain the respondent from interfering with the suit land.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was no suit pending before it, as the substantive matter had already been disposed of by a previous ruling that quashed the decision of the Machakos Land Disputes Tribunal. Since Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules only allows for the grant of temporary injunctions where a suit is pending, the court held that it had no jurisdiction to grant the injunctive relief sought by the applicant. The application was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 29.10.2014 is dismissed.
- Parties to bear their own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MACHAKOS
ELC MISC APPL. NO.233 OF 2010
REPUBLIC ……………………………………...……….. APPLICANT
VERSUS
MACHAKOS LAND DISPUTES TRIBUNAL ….…… RESPONDENT
CHIEF MAGISTRATE’S COURT MACHAKOS……… RESPONDENT
NELSON KILONZI …………………….…….. INTERESTED PARTY
JOSEPH MUASA KELI …………...………. EX PARTE APPLICANT
R U L I N G
By a Ruling dated 20. 3.2014 the court in the instant suit quashed the decision of Machakos Land Disputes Tribunal in LDT Case No.1/08. The Application to impugn the same award was canvassed without any opposition by the Respondent and the interested party who never filed Replying affidavits after they were served with the application. The ruling aforesaid disposed the entire matter.
However, by an application dated 29. 10. 2014 the interested party now Applicant filed Notice of Motion on 30. 10. 2014 seeking injunctive reliefs against the original Applicant/now Respondent Joseph Keli to stop him from interfering with the suit land. The Applicant invokes the provisions of Order 40 Rule 1(a) and (b), 2, 3 (1), (2) Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A Civil Procedure Act.
His main ground is that the Respondent is in the process of disposing suit land with a view of getting Applicant evicted from suit land. The Respondent is the Applicant’s father.
Order 40 Rule 1 is to the effect that:
“Where in a suit it is proved by affidavit or otherwise that the property in dispute is being alienated by any party to a suit … the court may grant temporary injunction to restrain such act …. Until disposal of the suit ….”
In the instant matter there is no suit pending and the matter has been disposed. The Respondent who was Applicant in the main matter has filed grounds of opposition and opposes the Application on grounds that in the circumstances of the matter herein the reliefs sought cannot issue. The court agrees with the Respondent’s grounds of opposition and finds no merit in the application.
The court thus makes the following orders:-
The Application dated 29. 10. 2014 is dismissed.
Parties to bear their own costs since they are relatives.
Signed and Delivered at Machakos, this 23rd day of January, 2015.
CHARLES KARIUKI
JUDGE