[2012] KEHC 5222 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 5222 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The affidavits did not clearly demonstrate how the plaintiffs acquired and developed the disputed properties, while the defendants provided evidence of substantial financial contributions from a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] KEHC 5222 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: The Trustees of Jom Foundation; Plaintiff: Joseph Odongo Mumma; Plaintiff: Augustine Mumma Odongo; Plaintiff: Charles Okello Odiwuor; Plaintiff: Charles Odongo Opiyo; Defendant: Chrisantus Kowino; Defendant: Hieke Pronl; Defendant: Godfrey Ocheing Onyango
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 150 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the defendants; preservation order issued
Judges
HK Chemitei
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Trust Property Disputes, Procedural Irregularities, Ownership of Land
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Interlocutory Injunctions Trust Property Disputes Procedural Irregularities Ownership of Land

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Trustees of Jom Foundation

Plaintiff

Joseph Odongo Mumma

Plaintiff

Augustine Mumma Odongo

Plaintiff

Charles Okello Odiwuor

Plaintiff

Charles Odongo Opiyo

Plaintiff

Chrisantus Kowino

Defendant

Hieke Pronl

Defendant

Godfrey Ocheing Onyango

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have established a prima facie case for grant of interlocutory injunction against the defendants.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the application was brought under the correct provisions of the law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The affidavits did not clearly demonstrate how the plaintiffs acquired and developed the disputed properties, while the defendants provided evidence of substantial financial contributions from a foreign sponsor. The court also held that the application was brought under the wrong provisions of the law, as Order 37 of the Civil Procedure Rules does not provide for injunctive relief. Consequently, the plaintiffs' application was dismissed with costs to the defendants. However, to preserve the subject matter, the court ordered that the plaintiffs and their agents should...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the defendants; preservation order issued

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' application dated 23rd September 2011 is dismissed with costs to the defendants.
  • Pending the hearing and determination of the suit, the plaintiffs, their servants and/or agents shall not sell, charge, subdivide, or otherwise part with land parcel number Kisumu/East Koguta/2025.