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

Nadim Hassan Bhatti & 2 others v William Kahindi Ruwa & 3 others [2020] KEELC 2989 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 2989 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
2989
Citation
[2020] KEELC 2989 (KLR)
Decided
29 April 2020
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil SuitPostureApplication for Interlocutory InjunctionCoramJ.O. OLOLA
Holding

The application for an interlocutory injunction is dismissed as the Plaintiffs have not shown a prima facie case with a probability of success and have not suffered irreparable injury that cannot be compensated by an award of damages.

Facts

The Plaintiffs, Nadim Hassan Bhatti, Stefano Buzzi, and Pietro Bertolotti, claim to have purchased a plot of land (Plot No. Gede/Mijimboni/1563) from the 1st Defendant, William Kahindi Ruwa, but the transaction was not completed. The 1st Defendant then sold the land to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Defendants, who are now developing the land without the Plaintiffs' knowledge or consent.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to an interlocutory injunction to restrain the Defendants from selling, transferring, or developing the land pending the suit.
  2. Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to rent payment to be deposited in Court pending the suit.

Reasoning

The Plaintiffs failed to complete the purchase of the land and the 1st Defendant sold it to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Defendants without their knowledge or consent. The Plaintiffs have not shown that they will suffer irreparable harm that cannot be compensated by an award of damages.

Outcome

The application for an interlocutory injunction is dismissed.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • Giella –vs- Cassman Brown & Company (1973) EA 358
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