[2019] KEELC 3032 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the grant of an inhibition order. The evidence showed that the 1st respondent was actively seeking to sell the suit property, and there was a real risk that the subject matter of the petition could be rendered nugatory if the order was not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 3032 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Seraphin Ndagara M’Mwamba; Respondent: David N. Kanampiu; Respondent: District Land Adjudication & Settlement Officer Meru South; Respondent: Director of Land Adjudication; Respondent: Land Registrar, Meru South; Respondent: Chief Land Registrar; Respondent: The Honourable Attorney General
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Constitutional Petition 03 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition Order
- Outcome
- interlocutory inhibition order granted
- Legal Topics
- Inhibition Orders, Land Registration, Protection of Property Rights, Interlocutory Injunctions
- 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
Seraphin Ndagara M’Mwamba
Applicant
David N. Kanampiu
Respondent
District Land Adjudication & Settlement Officer Meru South
Respondent
Director of Land Adjudication
Respondent
Land Registrar, Meru South
Respondent
Chief Land Registrar
Respondent
The Honourable Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an order of inhibition should issue to restrain registration of dealings in L.R. No. Kathwana/1215 pending determination of the petition.
- 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient grounds for preservation of the suit property.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the grant of an inhibition order. The evidence showed that the 1st respondent was actively seeking to sell the suit property, and there was a real risk that the subject matter of the petition could be rendered nugatory if the order was not granted. The court exercised its discretion to preserve the property and ensure the efficacy of the judicial process, holding that no satisfactory reason had been advanced by the respondent to deny the order. Accordingly, the court granted the inhibition order as sought in prayer 3 of the application.
Court Disposition
interlocutory inhibition order granted
Orders
- An order of inhibition is issued restraining the registration of dealings in L.R. No. Kathwana/1215 pending the hearing and determination of the application.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
50 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT & LAND COURT
AT CHUKA
CONSTITUTION PETITION NO. 03 OF 2019
IN THE MATTER OF CONTRAVENTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS UNDER ARTICLES 23(3), 27(1) & (2), 40 & 47 OF THE CONSTITUTION
AND
IN THE MATTER OF SECTIONS 25, 26, 27, 28 & 29 OF THE LAND ADJUDICATION ACT
AND
IN THE MATTER OF SECTIONS 26 & 110 OF THE LAND REGISTRATION ACT NO. 3 OF 2012
BETWEEN
SERAPHIN NDAGARA M’MWAMBA ..................................PETITIONER
AND
DAVID N. KANAMPIU .....................................................1ST RESPONDENT
DISTRICT LAND ADJUDICATION & SETTLEMENT OFFICER MERU
SOUTH ...............................................................................2ND RESPONDENT
DIRECTOR OF LAND ADJUDICATION .....................3RD RESPONDENT
LAND REGISTRAR, MERU SOUTH.............................4TH RESPONDENT
CHIEF LAND REGISTRAR ............................................5TH RESPONDENT
THE HONOURABLE ATTORNEY GENERAL.............6TH RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This application is dated 21. 5.2019 and seeks orders:
1. That this application be certified urgent.
2. That an interim order of inhibition do issue restraining the registration of dealings in L.R. No. Kathwana/1215 pending the interpartes hearing of this application.
3. That an order of inhibition do issue restraining the registration of dealing in L.R. No. Kathwana/1215 pending the hearing and determination of this application.
4. That costs of this application be provided for.
2. It has the following grounds:-
1. That the 1st Respondent is registered as the owner of L.R. No. Kathwana/1215.
2. That the said parcel of land is the subject of these proceedings.
3. That the 1st Respondent has put out the suit land for sale and various potential buyers have visited the same for inspection.
4. That unless dealings in respect of the suit land are inhibited, the 1st Respondent will move the suit land further from the reach of the petitioner.
5. That the purpose of this application is to preserve the suit land pending the determination of the issues at variance between the parties.
3. The application is buttressed by the affidavit of Seraphine Ndagara M’Mwamba sworn on 21st May, 2019 which states:
I, SERAPHINE NDAGARA M’MWAMBA an adult male person of sound mind and of P. O. Box 69 Marimanti do hereby make oath and state as follows:
1. That I am the Petitioner herein properly versed with all the issues stated herein.
2. That the subject matter of this Petition is L.R. No. Kathwana/1215 which is registered in the name of the 1st Respondent as can be deduced from the certificate of official search attached hereto.
3. That the 1st Respondent is soliciting for buyers of the suit property and has brought several potential purchasers to inspect the same.
4. That I am apprehensive that the 1st Respondent shall deal with the suit property in a manner that shall jeopardize the proper litigation of this petition.
5. That in the premises I humbly pray that an order of inhibition do issue to restrict any intended dealings with the suit property.
6. That it is in the interests of justice and fairness that these orders are sought.
7. That I depose to the foregoing believing the same to be true to the best of my knowledge, belief ad understanding.
4. Mr. Murithi represented the petitioner during interpartes hearing on 13. 6.2019. Mr. Edwin Kimathi held brief for Mr. Rimita, the 1st respondent’s advocate. They both addressed the court.
5. I find that there was no satisfactory reason given to the court to warrant denial of prayer 3 in the application. In the circumstances, prayer 3 is granted.
6. Costs shall be in the cause.
7. Parties are directed to come to court for directions on 8th July, 2019
Delivered in open Court at Chuka this 13th day of June, 2019in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Mark Muriithi for the Petitioner
Edwin Kimathi h/b Rimita for 1st Respondent
P. M. NJOROGE,
JUDGE.