[2009] KEHC 507 (KLR)
The court found that the main issue for determination is whether the plaintiff is the widow of the deceased and entitled to inherit the estate. Since the land is now registered in the names of the 1st and 2nd defendants, and there is a risk that the land could be disposed of before the substantive suit is heard, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] KEHC 507 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Sarah Jepkorir Kosen; Defendant: Maleta Ole Kosen; Defendant: Alice Kosen; Defendant: The Chairman, Land Dispute Tribunal, Central Division, Narok
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 166 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- Interlocutory injunction granted in favour of the plaintiff.
- Legal Topics
- Injunctions, Jurisdiction of Tribunals, Succession and Inheritance, Land Registration
- 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
Sarah Jepkorir Kosen
Plaintiff
Maleta Ole Kosen
Defendant
Alice Kosen
Defendant
The Chairman, Land Dispute Tribunal, Central Division, Narok
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is the widow of the deceased and entitled to inherit his estate.
- 2 Whether the Land Disputes Tribunal had jurisdiction to award the suit land to the 1st and 2nd defendants.
- 3 Whether an injunction should issue to restrain the 1st and 2nd defendants from disposing of the suit land pending determination of the suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the main issue for determination is whether the plaintiff is the widow of the deceased and entitled to inherit the estate. Since the land is now registered in the names of the 1st and 2nd defendants, and there is a risk that the land could be disposed of before the substantive suit is heard, the court held that granting an injunction is necessary to preserve the subject matter. The court further noted that if the plaintiff ultimately succeeds, any disposal of the land would render the judgment nugatory. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants from subdividing or disposing of the suit land until the...
Court Disposition
Interlocutory injunction granted in favour of the plaintiff.
Orders
- An injunction is issued restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants from subdividing or in any way disposing of the suit piece of land until this case is heard and determined.
- Costs of the application shall be costs in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
Civil Suit 166 of 2009
SARAH JEPKORIR KOSEN…………..………….PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MALETA OLE KOSEN….………………….1ST DEFENDANT
ALICE KOSEN …..….………………………2ND DEFENDANT
THE CHAIRMAN, LANDDISPUTE TRIBUNAL,
CENTRAL DIVISION, NAROK…………....3RD DEFENDANT
RULING
The plaintiff claims to be the widow of the late Livingston M. Kosen (the deceased). Upon obtaining a grant of letters of administration to the deceased estate in Eldoret High Court Probate and Administration Cause No. 146 of 1993 she got the deceased’s piece of land known as Title No. Cismara/Oleleshwa/861 registered in her name. The 1st and 2nd defendants claiming that the plaintiff is not a widow of the deceased filed a dispute before Narok Central Land Disputes Tribunal and got the land transferred to themselves. She has challenged the Tribunal’s powers to award the land to the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs and seeks among other things a declaration that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to do so. Pending the hearing and final determination of the suit she has applied for an injunction to restrain the 1st and 2nd defendants from in any way disposing the suit land. In his replying affidavit the 1st defendant avers that the plaintiff had fraudulently got the land registered in her name.
The main issue for determination in this matter appears to be whether or not the plaintiff is a widow of the deceased entitled to inherit his estate. As the land is now registered in the names of the 1st and 2nd defendants, if the court after hearing the case finds that the plaintiff is indeed the widow of the deceased, awarding her the declaration sought will be an exercise in futility if the land will been disposed of. In the circumstances I find that she is entitled to the injunction to restrain the 1st and 2nd defendants from subdividing or in any way disposing the suit piece of land until this case is heard and determined and I so order. The costs of this application shall be costs in cause.
DATED and delivered this 24th day of November, 2009.
D. K. MARAGA
JUDGE.