[2016] KEELC 778 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs demonstrated a prima facie case with a likelihood of success, as they are in occupation of the suit land and allege the 1st defendant holds it in trust for them. The threat of eviction by the 2nd defendant, following the alleged sale, posed a risk of irreparable harm to the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEELC 778 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Sabera Nchee; Plaintiff: Regina Kawira; Plaintiff: Nicholas Mutwiri; Plaintiff: Nahason Mutia; Plaintiff: Charles Kiburi; Defendant: Isaiah Kilui Baibere; Defendant: Dorcas Gakii M'Thiangeta
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 22 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction and Inhibition Application
- Outcome
- interlocutory injunction and inhibition granted with conditions
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Injunctions, Land Trusts, Eviction, Inhibition Orders
- 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
Sabera Nchee
Plaintiff
Regina Kawira
Plaintiff
Nicholas Mutwiri
Plaintiff
Nahason Mutia
Plaintiff
Charles Kiburi
Plaintiff
Isaiah Kilui Baibere
Defendant
Dorcas Gakii M'Thiangeta
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction and Inhibition Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from evicting them or interfering with their occupation of land parcel No. ATHIRU/RUUNJINE/989 pending determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether an order of inhibition restraining all dealings in the suit land should be granted pending hearing and determination of the suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs demonstrated a prima facie case with a likelihood of success, as they are in occupation of the suit land and allege the 1st defendant holds it in trust for them. The threat of eviction by the 2nd defendant, following the alleged sale, posed a risk of irreparable harm to the plaintiffs. The 2nd defendant's admission that she occupies a different parcel and the undertaking by the 1st defendant's counsel not to evict the 1st defendant from the land further supported the grant of the orders. In the interest of justice and to preserve the subject matter, the court granted the interlocutory injunction restraining eviction or interference with the plaintiffs'...
Court Disposition
interlocutory injunction and inhibition granted with conditions
Orders
- An interlocutory injunction is granted restraining the defendants from evicting the plaintiffs or interfering with their occupation of land parcel No. ATHIRU/RUUNJINE/989 pending determination of the suit, on condition that the plaintiffs do not evict or interfere with the 1st defendant's stay on the land.
- An order of inhibition is granted restraining all dealings in land parcel No. ATHIRU/RUUNJINE/989 pending hearing and determination of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
CIVIL SUIT NO 22 OF 2016
SABERA NCHEE......................................................1ST PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
REGINA KAWIRA …..............................................2ND PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
NICHOLAS MUTWIRI..............................................3RD PLAINTIF/APPLICANT
NAHASON MUTIA..................................................4TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
CHARLES KIBURI..................................................5TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
VERSUS
ISAIAH KILUI BAIBERE................................1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
DORCAS GAKII M'THIANGETA....................2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
This application is dated 13/04/2016 and seeks orders:-
THAT the Honourable Court be pleased to certify this application as urgent and hear it ex-parte in the first instance.
THAT the Honourable Court do issue an Order of Injunction restraining the defendants/respondents whether by themselves and/or their servants, assignees or anyone else acting at their behest from evicting Plaintiff or interfering with plaintiffs occupation of land parcel No ATHIRU/RUUNJINE/989 pending the hearing and determination of this suit application.
THAT the Honourable Court do issue an Order of Injunction restraining the defendants/respondents, whether by themselves and/or their servants, assignees or anyone else acting at their behest from evicting Plaintiffs or interfering with Plaintiffs occupation of land parcel No. ATHIRU/RUUNJINE/989 pending the hearing and determination of this suit .
THAT the Honourable Court be pleased to issue an Order of Inhibition restraining all dealings in Land Parcel NO. ATHIRU/RUUNJINE/989 pending the hearing and determination of this application.
THAT the Honourable Court be pleased to issue order of inhibition restraining all dealings in Land Parcel No. ATHIRU/RUUNJINE/989 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
That cost of this application be provided.
The application is supported by the Affidavit of SABENA NCHEE and has the following grounds:-
The Plaintiffs and their families are in occupation of land parcel No. ATHITU/RUUNJINE/989
That the said land is registered in the name of the 1st defendant to hold it in trust for the Plaintiffs .
That the 1st defendant has sold the said land to the 2nd Defendant who has threatened to evict the plaintiffs from the same.
That unless orders sought herein are issued the plaintiffs stand to suffer irreparably.
The application was heard interpartes on 23/05/2016, Mr. Kariuki, for the 2nd Defendant, informed the Court that the 2nd Defendant occupies parcel No. ATHIRU/RUUNJINE/9210 and will not be affected by any Injunctive Orders issued. Mr. Muthamia has undertaken that if Prayer 3 is granted the 1st defendant will not be kicked out of the suitland.
In the Interest of Justice and in order to have this matter heard and determined expeditiously, I issue the following orders:-
Prayer 3 is granted with the condition that the Plaintiffs will not evict the 1st Defendant or interfere with his stay on the suit land.
Prayer 5 is granted.
This application is heard and settled.
Costs shall be in the cause.
It is so ordered.
DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 23RD DAY OF MAY, 2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
cc: Daniel/Lilian
Muthamia h/b Mutembei for Plaintiffs
Manases Kariuki for the 2nd Defendant
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE