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

Moffat Gichuru v M'imanyara M'murithi & 2 others [2016] KEELC 774 (KLR)

[2016] KEELC 774 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
774
Citation
[2016] KEELC 774 (KLR)
Decided
19 May 2016
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLand DisputePostureAppeal from an original trial decisionCoramP. M. NJOROGE
Holding

The court adopted the parties' consents, allowing the Defendants to harvest their cabbages and carrots within two months of May 19, 2016, and to leave the Plaintiff's land pending the hearing and determination of the case.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Moffat Gichuru, filed an application against the Defendants, M'Imanyara M'Murithi, Wilson Mwirigi, and Bindi Gichuru, seeking orders to restrain them from destroying his properties and entering his land parcels ABOGETA/U-KITHANGARI/2541 and ABOGETA/U-KITHANGARI/2514.

Issues

  1. Restraining orders against the Defendants
  2. Preservation of the Plaintiff's land parcels

Reasoning

The court considered the Plaintiff's long-term occupation and development of the land, the Defendants' threats and intimidation, and the need to preserve the Plaintiff's peaceful possession of his property.

Outcome

The application is deemed heard and determined.

Orders

  • Orders of inhibition upon land parcel No. ABOGETA/U-KITHANGARI/2541 for preservation of the subject matter until this application is heard and determined.
  • Orders of inhibition upon land parcel No. ABOGETA/U-KITHANGARI/2514 for preservation of the subject matter until this application is heard and determined.
  • Enforcement through the O.C.S Nkubu Police Station and the respondent pays cost of this application.

Remedies

  • Preservation of the Plaintiff's land parcels
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