Munge v Munge (Civil Appeal (Application) 36 of 2020) [2023] KECA 75 (KLR) (3 February 2023) (Ruling)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- 75
- Citation
- [2023] KECA 75 (KLR)
- Decided
- 3 February 2023
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil Appeal (Application)PostureApplication for injunction pending the hearing and determination of the appealCoramD. K. MUSINGA, DR. K. I. LAIBUTA, M. GACHOKA, CIArb, FCIArb
Holding
The court dismissed the application for injunction, finding that the appeal is not arguable and that the applicant's claim of adverse possession is not valid.
Facts
The applicant Patrick Karige Munge filed a suit seeking to be declared the owner of the suit properties under the doctrine of adverse possession. The suit was dismissed by the Environment and Land Court of Kenya. The applicant then filed an appeal, but was evicted from the suit properties before the appeal was heard.
Issues
- Whether the appeal is arguable
- Whether the applicant's claim of adverse possession is valid
Reasoning
The court held that the applicant did not establish continuous adverse occupation of the suit properties for a period exceeding 12 years and that his occupation was with the permission of the owner.
Outcome
The application for injunction was dismissed.
Authorities cited
Cases cited (1)
- Samuel Miki Waweru v Jane Njeri Ruchu, [2007] eKLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Loading judgment…