Kyoto Ventures & another v Bariu & another (Environment and Land Appeal E013 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 4114 (KLR) (17 June 2026) (Judgment) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 4114 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NANYUKI ENVIRONMENT AND LAND APPEAL E013 OF 2023 LN MBUGUA, J JUNE 17, 2026 BETWEEN KYOTO VENTURES ......................................................................... 1ST APPELLANT JUDY WANJIKU KOINE ................................................................. 2ND APPELLANT AND FREDRICK BARIU ....................................................................... 1ST RESPONDENT CECILIA MRINTARI ................................................................... 2ND RESPONDENT (Being an appeal from the Ruling of Hon A. R. Kithinji (CM) delivered at Nanyuki Law Courts on 24.10.2023 in CMCC No.132 of 2023) JUDGMENT 1. This judgment relates to the ruling delivered by the trial court on 24.10.2023. The brief background to this matter is that the appellants filed a suit before the trial court vide a plaint dated 12.10.23 seeking orders of permanent injunction restraining the respondents from burying one George Muriuki on parcel Nanyuki Municipality Block 4/6. An application was contemporaneously filed with the plaint by the appellants seeking more or less similar orders as in the main suit, that is to stop the burial of George Muriuki on the suit land. In the ruling delivered on 24.10.2023, the aforementioned application was dismissed, triggering this appeal. 2. The appeal was canvassed by way of written submissions. The submissions of the appellant are dated 20.4.2026. They are rather brief. They argue that the title document was suficient material to proof that they are the registered owners of the suit land in question. Thus they had satisfied the criteria for the grant of an interlocutory injunction. 3. The submissions of the respondent are dated 28.7.2025. They argue that the appellants had sought orders of injunction to stop the respondents from burying one George Muriuki M. Imathiu on the https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4114/eng@2026-06-17 1
page 1 of 2
suit land. That pursuant to the ruling of 24.10.2023, the burial took place the same day of 24.10.2023, thus the orders sought are an academic exercise. To this end, the case of Evans Kidero v Speaker of the Nairobi City Assembly & Another (2018) eKLR amongst other cases has been cited. 4. I have considered all the arguments profiered herein. The appellant has not rebutted the averments made by the respondent that burial took place on 24.10.2023. As rightly submitted by the respondent this appeal appears to be spent as the alleged burial took place more than two years ago. A matter is moot if further legal proceedings with regard to it can have no efiect, or events have placed it beyond the reach of the law, such that the matter has been deprived of practical significance or rendered purely academic. See Evans Kidero v Speaker of the Nairobi City Assembly & Another (2018) eKLR. 5. In the circumstances, I find that this appeal is not merited, the same is hereby dismissed with costs to the respondent. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NANYUKI THIS 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2026 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS. LUCY N. MBUGUA JUDGE In the presence of: Nancy Mwangi – C/A Absent for appellant Absent for respondent https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4114/eng@2026-06-17 2
page 2 of 2