SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Samuel M. Ndirangu & 141 Others v County Government, Baringo & 2 others [2014] KEELC 315 (KLR)

[2014] KEELC 315 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
315
Citation
[2014] KEELC 315 (KLR)
Decided
9 July 2014
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypePetition for Land Adjudication and Conservatory OrdersPosturePetition granted with conservatory ordersCoramJustice MUNYAO SILA
Holding

Petition granted with conservatory orders to prevent eviction and new developments on the land pending the hearing and determination of the petition.

Facts

Petitioners claim to be rightful owners of land in Kisarget Village, Eldama Ravine Town, allocated by the former Eldama Ravine Town Clerk. They seek adjudication and registration of their land, and conservatory orders to prevent eviction.

Issues

  1. Nature of the land (community or private), and whether it can be subject to adjudication under the Land Adjudication Act
  2. Right to quiet enjoyment and use of the land

Reasoning

The court found the petitioners in danger of eviction and granted conservatory orders to preserve the status quo. The court deferred to the issues of land nature and adjudication process for the petition.

Outcome

Petition granted

Orders

  • Restraining respondents from evicting petitioners
  • Restraining petitioners from making new developments
  • Maintaining status quo on the suit land

Remedies

  • Preservation of the status quo pending the hearing and determination of the petition
  • Petitioners' rights to quiet enjoyment and use of the land

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Land Adjudication Act, CAP 284, Laws of Kenya
  • Constitution of Kenya
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.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case