[2017] KEELC 561 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 561 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for the grant of a temporary injunction. The main basis was the irregularity and secrecy in the transfer of the suit land from the deceased's name to the defendants before a confirmed grant of letters of administration and consent to transfer were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 561 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Shem Okore Ogola (administrator of the estate of Pius Oyieko Ogola, deceased); Defendant: Rispa Arum Akumu; Defendant: Tom Mboya Ayugi; Defendant: Jared Nyanguti; Defendant: Mifely Enterprises; Defendant: Land Registrar, Nyando
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 350 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application for Temporary Injunction Pending Hearing and Determination of the Suit
Outcome
Plaintiff's application for temporary injunction allowed.
Legal Topics
Temporary Injunctions, Succession Disputes, Transfer of Land, Administration of Estates
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Temporary Injunctions Succession Disputes Transfer of Land Administration of Estates

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shem Okore Ogola (administrator of the estate of Pius Oyieko Ogola, deceased)

Plaintiff

Rispa Arum Akumu

Defendant

Tom Mboya Ayugi

Defendant

Jared Nyanguti

Defendant

Mifely Enterprises

Defendant

Land Registrar, Nyando

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application for Temporary Injunction Pending Hearing and Determination of the Suit

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case with a probability of success to warrant the grant of a temporary injunction.
  2. 2 Whether the transfer of the suit land was irregular for lack of a confirmed grant and consent from the Land Control Board.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for the grant of a temporary injunction. The main basis was the irregularity and secrecy in the transfer of the suit land from the deceased's name to the defendants before a confirmed grant of letters of administration and consent to transfer were obtained. The court noted that while the 1st defendant provided a letter of consent for one transfer, there was no evidence of a confirmed grant at the time of the transfers. The court also observed that the plaintiff had filed summons for revocation or annulment of grant in the succession court, which was still pending. Given the frequency of transfers and the risk of the...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application for temporary injunction allowed.

Orders

  • Defendants are restrained from selling, transferring, negotiating for sale, abetting the sale, or registering the transfer of land title No. Kisumu/West Koguta/3023 pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
  • Costs of the application to be in the cause.