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

Naresh Jayantilal Ranpura v Halane Constructions Co. Ltd & another [2016] KEELC 699 (KLR)

[2016] KEELC 699 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
699
Citation
[2016] KEELC 699 (KLR)
Decided
15 July 2016
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeInjunctionPostureApplication for Temporary Injunction and Mandatory InjunctionCoramO. A. Angote
Holding

The Plaintiff has established a prima facie case with chances of success and the Court allows the Application for Temporary Injunction and Mandatory Injunction.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Naresh Jayantilal Ranpura, is the registered proprietor of sub-division number 879 of Section III MN. On 26th October, 2015, he found bulldozers excavating boulders on his land. The Defendants, Halane Constructions Co. Ltd and Mohamed Rashid, are alleged to have illegally removed coral boulders and gravel from the Plaintiff's land.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the suit property
  2. Whether the Defendants have a right to use the suit property

Reasoning

The Plaintiff is the registered owner of the suit property as evidenced by the Certificate of Title. The Defendants have no right to use the suit property as they are not the registered proprietors.

Outcome

The Plaintiff's Application is allowed.

Orders

  • Temporary injunction restraining the Defendants from excavating, digging and/or removing coral boulders and any other material from the suit property
  • Mandatory order compelling the Defendants to return the coral boulders illegally removed from the suit property and reinstate the property in the manner it was prior to their actions

Remedies

  • Injunction to prevent further damage to the suit property
  • Compulsory return of illegally removed coral boulders and reinstatement of the property
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case