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

Mistry Jadva Parbat & Co. (Epz) Limited v Mega Garments Industries Kenya (Epz) Limted [2015] KEELC 212 (KLR)

[2015] KEELC 212 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
212
Citation
[2015] KEELC 212 (KLR)
Decided
30 July 2015
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil SuitPostureSummary Judgment MotionCoramA. OMOLLO
Holding

The court allows the plaintiff's application for vacant possession and orders the defendant to surrender the premises within 60 days. If the defendant fails to do so, the plaintiff is at liberty to execute.

Facts

The plaintiff, Mistry Jadva Parbat & Co. (EPZ) Limited, seeks vacant possession of land known as land reference number MN/V/655 from the defendant, MEGA Garments Industries Kenya (EPZ) Limited. The plaintiff claims the defendant has no title to the land and is therefore trespassing.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant has a valid lease and reasonable expectation for an automatic extension
  2. Whether the defendant is in rent arrears or breaching the tenancy
  3. Whether the plaintiff's claim for mesne profits is valid

Reasoning

The court found that the defendant had a valid lease and reasonable expectation for an automatic extension, but the plaintiff's claim for mesne profits is based on a valuation report that includes improvements made by the defendant. The court allows the defendant to present its case on the rent dispute.

Outcome

The application is allowed with costs.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to surrender the premises within 60 days.
  • If the defendant fails to surrender the premises, the plaintiff is at liberty to execute.

Remedies

  • Vacant possession of the land

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Environment and Land Court Act 2011
  • EPZ Act, Cap 517 of the Laws of Kenya
Cases cited (2)
  • ICDC Vs Daber Enterprises Ltd. (2000) /EA 75
  • Kasturi Supra
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