Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2017] KEELC 185 (KLR)

Joseph Mungathia Kibuthania v Julius Gitonga & 3 others [2017] KEELC 185 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
24 October 2017
465 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan landowner with a title deed and 50 years' occupation won a court order blocking defendants from interfering with his land until the case is decided.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff moved the Environment and Land Court by Notice of Motion dated 20th September 2017 seeking temporary injunctions restraining the defendants, their agents and servants from interfering with his possession, user and/or occupation of land parcel LR NO. IGEMBE/AKIRANG'ONDU 'B'/1493, with costs of the application against the defendant. The plaintiff asserted he was the registered owner, exhibited a title deed, and averred he had occupied and developed the land for over 50 years. He alleged that on 25th August 2017 the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants, with hired persons, invaded the parcel, encroached on it, destroyed seasonal food crops and erected a fence. He further alleged that on perusing the Igembe/Akirang'ondu Adjudication Registry Index Map Sheet No. 19/5 he discovered that the four defendants had conspired to fraudulently alter the map, removing him and his parcel and replacing them with the defendants' lands. He also alleged the defendants threatened eviction and had begun harvesting his miraa trees. The defendants were served but filed no response. The court found the application merited on the uncontroverted material and allowed it, but limited the injunctive orders to a period of 8 months. Costs were not awarded; the court made no orders as to costs. The judgment is delivered by L.N. Mbugua, ELC Judge, on 24th October 2017.

Key legal issues

#
01

Entitlement to a temporary injunction over land where the plaintiff claims registered ownership and alleges fraudulent alteration of the adjudication registry index map

Holding

The application was allowed; injunctive orders issued but limited to 8 months

Reasoning

The plaintiff produced a title deed showing he is the registered owner and swore he had occupied the land for over 50 years. He alleged the defendants invaded the parcel on 25/08/17, destroyed crops, erected a fence and fraudulently altered the registry index map to remove his parcel. The defendants were served but filed no response. On the uncontroverted material, the court found the application merited, granting the injunction but limiting its duration to 8 months and making no order on costs.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An unopposed injunction application, if supported by evidence of registered ownership and long occupation, may be allowed on the papers

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Application dated 20th September 2017 allowed
  2. 2.Temporary injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, servants or anyone working at their behest from interfering with the plaintiff's possession, user and/or occupation of land parcel LR NO. IGEMBE/AKIRANG'ONDU 'B'/1493 pending the hearing and determination of the suit
  3. 3.Injunctive orders to remain in force for a period of 8 months
  4. 4.No orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Not stated in the judgment (Environment and Land Court exercising original jurisdiction over land disputes)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Joseph Mungathia Kibuthania v Julius Gitonga & 3 others [2017] KEELC 185 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/185/eng@2017-10-24

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.