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

Raurenjia Nguru Njiri & another v Jane Terry Wanjiru Mbogo [2017] KEELC 1651 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 1651 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
1651
Citation
[2017] KEELC 1651 (KLR)
Decided
26 September 2017
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeInterlocutory InjunctionPostureApplication for Interlocutory Injunction DismissedCoramY.M. ANGIMA
The court is not satisfied that the 1st Plaintiff has satisfied the second principle for the grant of an order of interlocutory injunction.

Facts

The 1st Plaintiff, Raurenjia Nguru Njiri, filed a notice of motion seeking two interlocutory injunctions against the Defendant, Jane Terry Wanjiru Mbogo, to restrain her from harvesting, cultivating, utilizing, damaging, causing acts of waste by cutting trees and interfering with the suit property. The Defendant, Jane, claimed she was married to the 1st Plaintiff's son and had been using the suit property for 17 years.

Issues

  • Whether the 1st Plaintiff has satisfied the requirements for the grant of an order for interlocutory injunction.
  • Whether the 1st Plaintiff is likely to suffer irreparable loss or damage unless the orders sought are granted.

Reasoning

The 1st Plaintiff as the current registered owner has made out a prima facie case with a probability of success, but the allegations of fraud can only be conclusively determined by the trial court at a later stage.

Outcome

The 1st Plaintiff's notice of motion dated 8th March 2017 is hereby disallowed. There shall be no orders as to costs.

Orders

  • The suit shall be heard on priority basis.
  • The court shall give directions on the hearing of the suit at the time of delivery of the ruling.

Remedies

  • No remedy was granted as the application was dismissed.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • Giella v. Cassman Brown & Co Ltd [1973] EA 358
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case