Michire v Ngimu Farm Land & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E041 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2329 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Murang'a court stopped any sale or transfer of a disputed Makuyu plot pending trial, ruling that a claimed fraud may extend limitation time.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the suit is time-barred under the Limitation of Actions Act
The court could not determine limitation at the interlocutory stage without full pleadings; the alleged fraud appeared to be continuing and pending DCI investigations, and the 1st Defendant's invitation to the Plaintiff to file pleadings in ELC E028/2022 suggested the claim was within time.
The court noted uncertainty as to when the alleged fraud was discovered, and that the fraud appeared continuing and still under DCI investigation. No defences had been filed despite directions, and the 1st Defendant's invitation to the Plaintiff to plead in E028/2022 seemed to admit the claim was within time. Following DT Dobie, a court should sustain rather than dismiss a suit without all facts.
Whether a temporary injunction should issue pending hearing of the suit
A prima facie case with a probability of success was established; the Plaintiff paid for the land, took possession and was allegedly forcibly evicted without due process, and the suit land risked alienation, warranting preservation of the substratum of the suit.
Applying Order 40 principles, the court found the Plaintiff demonstrated payment for the land, possession and development, and forcible eviction, none of which the Defendants answered. Alienation pending trial would prejudice the Plaintiff, so the substratum of the suit required preservation until determination.
Legal principles established
#- A court would rather sustain a suit than dismiss it without first having all the facts before it.
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted for the suit filed out of time to be deemed properly filed (residual orders sought; motion allowed in terms of prayer (iv))
- 2.Temporary injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents and servants from disposing of, charging, dealing with or alienating Makuyu/Kimorori/Block 1/1928 pending hearing and determination of the suit
- 3.Costs in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 40 rules 1, 2 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Michire v Ngimu Farm Land & 3 others (Environment and Land Case E041 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 2329 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of motion dated 24-6-2025 (suit number not stated in the judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2329/eng@2026-04-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.