[2018] KEELC 2033 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 2033 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had proved his case on a balance of probabilities. The lease agreement and payment records established that the defendants were let into possession of the suit premises and paid only the initial deposit and one month's rent. The defendants failed to pay further rent, did not vacate...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 2033 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Thomas Kiti Nyalé; Defendant: John Roki Waithaka; Defendant: Joel Mutararura Karanja
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 24 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff
Judges
CK Yano
Legal Topics
Lease Agreements, Mesne Profits, Vacant Possession, Breach of Contract
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Lease Agreements Mesne Profits Vacant Possession Breach of Contract

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Kiti Nyalé

Plaintiff

John Roki Waithaka

Defendant

Joel Mutararura Karanja

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a mandatory injunction compelling the defendants to grant vacant possession of the suit premises.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to rent or mesne profits for the period the defendants remained in possession without payment.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs and interest.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had proved his case on a balance of probabilities. The lease agreement and payment records established that the defendants were let into possession of the suit premises and paid only the initial deposit and one month's rent. The defendants failed to pay further rent, did not vacate the premises upon notice, and did not respond to the suit. The plaintiff's evidence was unchallenged. The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to judgment for the unpaid rent for the period the defendants remained in possession, as well as costs and interest. The reliefs sought were granted as the defendants' continued occupation without payment constituted a breach of...

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff against the defendants jointly and severally for Kshs.1,350,000 plus costs and interest.
  • Defendants to grant vacant possession of the premises to the plaintiff.