Ngeno v Chepkwony (Sued in His Capacity as the Legal Representative of Taplule w/o Kenda - Deceased) & another (Environment & Land Case E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 57 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kericho court protected a man who farmed disputed land for 40 years, blocking its sale or transfer until his adverse possession claim is decided.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicant established a prima facie case with probability of success
Yes. The Applicant demonstrated possession of 1.5 acres of LR No. Kericho/Getarwet/89 for over 40 years, supported by the green card showing registration of the parcel in the name of Taplule w/o Kenda on 12th November, 1968 and issuance of a title deed on 12th May, 2017.
The court adopted the Mrao definition of a prima facie case as an arguable case showing an apparently infringed right calling for rebuttal. On the material presented, including the Applicant's long possession, developments (tea, trees, fish ponds) and the pending boundary-determination application in the succession matter, the court found the Applicant had sufficiently demonstrated a prima facie case with probability of success.
Whether the Applicant demonstrated irreparable injury not compensable in damages
Yes. The Applicant, in occupation for over forty years with comprehensive developments, faced potential eviction that damages could not remedy.
Applying Pius Kipchirchir Kogo v Frank Kimeli Tenai, the court noted that irreparable injury is injury not adequately compensable in damages and with no other remedy. The Applicant's long occupation and apprehension of eviction by the Respondents emboldened by the confirmed grant satisfied this limb.
Whether an order of inhibition should issue pending the hearing and determination of the suit
Yes. An order of inhibition issued under Section 68(1) of the Land Registration Act to preserve the suit property by restraining any dealings, registration and transactions over the land.
Relying on Section 68(1) of the Land Registration Act and Dorcas Muthoni & 2 Others v Michael Ireri Ngari as applied in Daniel Gitau Kuria v Muthoni Mbugua Ndumo, the court held that inhibition, like an interlocutory injunction, preserves the property in dispute pending trial and may be granted where the Applicant shows good grounds.
Legal principles established
#- The conditions for grant of an interlocutory injunction are a prima facie case with probability of success, irreparable injury not compensable in damages, and, if in doubt, the balance of convenience.
- An order of inhibition under Section 68 of the Land Registration Act operates like a prohibitory injunction to preserve disputed property pending trial, and requires good grounds.
Court orders
#- 1.Temporary injunction restraining the Respondents, their agents and/or servants, from selling, sub-dividing, charging, transferring, encroaching on and/or interfering with the Applicant's quiet possession of 1.5 acres of land comprised in LR No. Kericho/Getarwet/89 pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
- 2.Order of inhibition restraining any dealings, registration and transactions whatsoever over land parcel LR No. Kericho/Getarwet/89 pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
- 3.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the suit.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B, 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Orders 40 & 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ngeno v Chepkwony (Sued in His Capacity as the Legal Representative of Taplule w/o Kenda - Deceased) & another (Environment & Land Case E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 57 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Originating Summons dated 27th February, 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/57/eng@2025-01-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.