Masha v Mweni & 2 others (Environment and Land Originating Motion E001 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 2122 (KLR) (14 April 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 2122 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MALINDI ENVIRONMENT AND LAND ORIGINATING MOTION E001 OF 2026 FM NJOROGE, J APRIL 14, 2026 BETWEEN DHAHABU KAHINDI MASHA ............................................................... PLAINTIFF AND JOSEPH KAHINDI MWENI ........................................................... 1ST DEFENDANT KKB INFORMAL SETTLEMENT SCHEME ............................... 2ND DEFENDANT LAND REGISTRAR KILIFI ........................................................... 3RD DEFENDANT RULING 1. The notice of motion dated 15th January 2026 is seeking a temporary injunction restraining the respondents, their successors and or assigns from evicting the applicant or in any way interfering with the applicant’s quiet possession on Plot Number 47 (Formerly Plot Number 423) within Kilifi town Kasarani area pending the hearing of the present suit. 2. The suit is an adverse possession claim in which the plaintifi alleges that she and her family have been in actual possession of the suit properties since 1994 and has established a thriving business thereon. The application is supported by the sworn afidavit of the applicant dated 15th January 2026. 3. The application is opposed by the 1st respondent who filed a replying afidavit dated 2nd February 2026. He deponed that he purchased the suit property when the plaintifi was a tenant there on living in a temporary mud-walled makuti house thereon; that thereafter, the plaintifi continued to pay rent in the sum of Kenya Shillings 200/= per month; that however, over time, she took advantage of the plaintifi’s long stay up country and, in cahoots with the 2nd defendant, purported to register the suit land in her own names; that when the 1st defendant confronted her, she conceded she had no such right and the plot registration was reverted to the 1st defendant, and he and the plaintifi executed an agreement which ensures that the suit property has remained the plaintifi's property ever since. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2122/eng@2026-04-14 1
page 1 of 2
4. The 1st defendant’s claim therefore is that the plaintifi is on the suit property with his consent; that however the applicant and his adult children are now putting up a permanent house which they have rented to third parties for business; that the dispute was reported by the 1st defendant to the 2nd defendant regarding the said activity. That vide an afidavit made on 8th December 2025, the applicant conceded that the suit property belongs to the 1st defendant. The dispute was escalated to the National Land Commission (NLC) which after hearing both parties directed that the suit property be reinstated into the 1st defendant's name. That the NLC's decision has not been challenged or quashed by way of judicial review. The deponent further states that the contents of the afidavit are contradictory in that some parts claim that she is the owner, while some other parts claim that she is seeking be registered as owner under the doctrine of adverse possession. 5. The application was disposed of by way of written submissions. The applicant filed submissions dated 25/1/2026 while the respondent filed submissions dated 27/2/2026. I have considered both sets of submissions in the preparation of this ruling. 6. This court has taken note that both the applicant and the respondent are apprehensive of one another’s conduct with regard to the suit property; that whereas the applicant is wary of being evicted and her adverse possession claim being defeated by resultant loss of possession and thus seeks injunctive orders, the 1st respondent is apprehensive that the applicant is conducting developments of a permanent nature that will alter the state of the suit property completely. 7. The conclusion of this court is that both parties required to be restrained from any activities with regard the suit land pending the hearing of the main suit so that the present status of the suit land is preserved until finalization of these proceedings. 8. Consequently, this court orders as follows: 9. a. The motion dated 15th January 2026 is allowed in terms of prayer number c thereof with their additional condition that the plaintifi shall cease all developments thereon pending the hearing and determination of the present suit. b. Since a response has already been filed to the originating summons, directions are hereby given that the originating summons shall be heard as though commenced by way of plaint and that the OS and the supporting afidavit shall be deemed as the Plaint while the replying afidavit shall be deemed as the Defense. c. Hearing shall be by way of viva voce evidence. d. Hearing of the main suit shall be on 23rd September 2026 and 24th September 2026 and all witnesses for both sides shall be availed without fail. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MALINDI ON THIS 14TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026. MWANGI NJOROGE, JUDGE, ELC, MALINDI. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2122/eng@2026-04-14 2
page 2 of 2