Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedEnvironment & Land Case 277 of 2017· [2022] KEELC 13361 (KLR)

Mathu v Shilo Tabernacle Church & another

Environment and Land Court
28 September 2022
TMT. W. Murigi
827 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling on a Notice of Motion dated 24 June 2021 by Kariuki Mathu, the plaintiff in Environment & Land Case 277 of 2017 at Makueni, seeking an order directing the Officer Commanding Kibwezi Police Station to ensure compliance with the judgment delivered in the suit on 11 May 2021. The underlying suit, filed by plaint dated 15 December 2016, sought a permanent injunction against trespass on L.R. No. 12080 at Kibwezi, an eviction notice, general damages and costs. It proceeded ex parte on 19 November 2020 after the defendants' advocate was served with a hearing notice, and on 11 May 2021 the court entered judgment for the plaintiff in those terms, awarding Kshs 300,000 general damages. The applicant deposed that the respondents, though served with the decree extracted on 14 January 2022, refused to vacate the suit property and had a tendency of disobeying court orders. The respondents were served with the application but neither responded nor participated; the application was canvassed by written submissions. Framing the sole issue as whether the applicant was entitled to the orders sought, the court noted that the judgment had neither been set aside nor challenged, that the respondents had not given vacant possession, and held that litigation must come to an end and the applicant was entitled to enjoy the fruits of his judgment. The court allowed the application, issued an eviction notice against the respondents in respect of L.R. No. 12080, authorised the OCS Kibwezi Police Station to enforce compliance with the orders of 11 May 2021, and awarded costs of the application to the applicant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Applicant is entitled to an eviction notice and police enforcement of the judgment of 11 May 2021

Holding

Yes. The judgment in favour of the Applicant stands unchallenged, a decree was extracted, and the Respondents have not given vacant possession; the Court issued the eviction notice and authorised the OCS Kibwezi to enforce compliance.

Reasoning

The suit was heard ex parte and judgment was entered on 11 May 2021 granting a permanent injunction, an eviction notice, general damages of Kshs 300,000 and costs. Despite service of the decree, the Respondents did not vacate. The judgment had not been set aside or appealed. The Court held that litigation must come to an end and the Applicant should enjoy the fruits of his judgment, and granted the enforcement orders sought.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A judgment-holder is entitled to enjoy the fruits of his judgment where the judgment has not been set aside or challenged and the losing party refuses to comply.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order of an eviction Notice be and is hereby issued against the Respondents from occupying land parcel L.R No. 12080
  2. 2.The Officer Commanding Kibwezi Police Station is hereby authorized to enforce compliance of the Court orders issued on 11th May 2021
  3. 3.The Respondents to bear the cost of this application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 3A
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 159 of the Constitution and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (inherent jurisdiction)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mathu v Shilo Tabernacle Church & another", Case Analysis (2022). Environment & Land Case 277 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/13361/eng@2022-09-28

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