[2021] KEELC 4113 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 4113 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case as the registered proprietor of LR KARINGANI/NDAGANI/594, with evidence that the demolished building was constructed with statutory approvals and stood on private land. The applicant demonstrated a risk of irreparable loss if further entry or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELC 4113 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joshua Rutere Mucheke (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 Limited; 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 E001 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Application for Injunction; Confirmation of Interim Orders
Outcome
interim injunction confirmed; application deemed heard and determined
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Land Ownership Disputes, Demolition of Structures, Statutory Approvals, Road Reserve Encroachment
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctive Relief Land Ownership Disputes Demolition of Structures Statutory Approvals Road Reserve Encroachment

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joshua Rutere Mucheke (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 Limited

Respondent

Inspector General of Police

Respondent

OCS Chuka Police Station

Respondent

Honourable Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Application for Injunction; Confirmation of Interim Orders

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from entering, excavating or constructing a road on LR KARINGANI/NDAGANI/594.
  2. 2 Whether the demolished building was lawfully constructed on private land with statutory approvals.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss if the injunction is not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case as the registered proprietor of LR KARINGANI/NDAGANI/594, with evidence that the demolished building was constructed with statutory approvals and stood on private land. The applicant demonstrated a risk of irreparable loss if further entry or construction by the defendants was not restrained, as damages would not adequately compensate for loss of property and use. The balance of convenience favored maintaining the status quo pending determination of the main suit. The court therefore confirmed the interim injunction restraining the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants from entering, excavating, or constructing a road on the...

Court Disposition

interim injunction confirmed; application deemed heard and determined

Orders

  • The application is deemed heard and determined with costs in the cause.
  • The 1st, 4th, 5th, and 6th defendants are granted 30 days to file and exchange their defences and comply with Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules.