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

County Government of Taita Taveta v Isangaiwich Group Ranch & 3 others [2021] KEELC 1343 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 1343 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
1343
Citation
[2021] KEELC 1343 (KLR)
Decided
27 October 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureAppeal from an original trialCoramN.A. MATHEKA
Holding

The application for a temporary injunction is dismissed. The constitutional petition is not stayed.

Facts

The plaintiff, County Government of Taita Taveta, seeks a temporary injunction against defendants to prevent them from charging, selling, leasing, or further sub-dividing land formally known as Bura/Isangaishi/18 and later subdivided to Bura/Isangaiwishi/18 and Bura/Isangaiwich/19 and Bura/Isangaiwich/20. The defendants have filed a constitutional petition seeking to determine the membership of the ISANGAIWISHI GROUP.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendants' application for a temporary injunction should be granted.
  2. Whether the constitutional petition should be stayed pending the outcome of this suit.

Reasoning

The court finds no reason to stay the proceedings and dismisses the application for a temporary injunction. The constitutional petition is not stayed as the defendants would have raised their claim in this matter if they so wished.

Outcome

The application for a temporary injunction is dismissed. The constitutional petition is not stayed.

Orders

  • The application for a temporary injunction is dismissed.
  • The constitutional petition is not stayed.

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Community Land Act, 2017
  • Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21 Laws of Kenya
  • Constitution of Kenya
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