[2014] KEHC 8636 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 8636 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff demonstrated ownership of LR No. 27627/54 through documentary evidence and corroborating affidavits from Kandara Development Company Ltd. The defendant admitted ownership of a different plot (LR No. 27627/96) and did not deny developing on the plaintiff's plot. The court held that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 8636 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Teresiah Nyambura Karera; Defendant: Pauline Nyanguthie Mutahi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 689 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
Plaintiff's application for interlocutory injunction allowed.
Judges
LN Gacheru
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Land Ownership Disputes, Trespass, Prima Facie Case
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctive Relief Land Ownership Disputes Trespass Prima Facie Case

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Teresiah Nyambura Karera

Plaintiff

Pauline Nyanguthie Mutahi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case with a probability of success to warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience tilts in favour of granting the injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff demonstrated ownership of LR No. 27627/54 through documentary evidence and corroborating affidavits from Kandara Development Company Ltd. The defendant admitted ownership of a different plot (LR No. 27627/96) and did not deny developing on the plaintiff's plot. The court held that if the defendant continued construction, the plaintiff would suffer irreparable harm not compensable by damages, as the substratum of the property would be altered. The balance of convenience favored the plaintiff, as the official records confirmed her ownership. Applying the principles in Giella v Cassman Brown, the court concluded the plaintiff had established a prima facie...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application for interlocutory injunction allowed.

Orders

  • An order of injunction is issued restraining the defendant, her agents, servants, or anyone claiming through her from trespassing into, constructing, or continuing construction on LR No. 27627/54, Utawala, Nairobi, pending determination of the main suit.
  • The Officer Commanding Police Division (OCPD) Embakasi is ordered to ensure compliance with the injunction order.