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

Johnstone Nyagweso Masongo v Philip Onyari Ogendi & 5 others [2012] KEHC 2130 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 2130 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
2130
Citation
[2012] KEHC 2130 (KLR)
Decided
23 August 2012
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeReal Property DisputePostureApplication for InjunctionCoramR. LAGAT-KORIR
Holding

The court declines to grant an injunction as prayed for, but orders that status quo be maintained and that there be no further alienation, transfer, or sale of the suit land pending the hearing and determination of the suit.

Facts

The plaintiff, Johnstone Nyangweso Masongo, claims to own a plot of land known as Plot L.R. No. 8805 at Ikonge Trading Centre. The defendants, Philip Onyari Ogendi and others, claim the land belongs to the County Council of Nyamira. The plaintiff alleges the defendants have trespassed and erected structures on the land.

Issues

  1. Ownership of the disputed land
  2. Whether to grant an injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with the land

Reasoning

The court finds that the defendants have demonstrated actual possession of the suit property and have undertaken development thereon, making it difficult to grant an injunction. The court orders that the status quo be maintained to preserve the suit property.

Outcome

The application is dismissed, and the court orders status quo.

Orders

  • Status quo be maintained
  • No further alienation, transfer, or sale of the suit land pending the hearing and determination of the suit herein

Remedies

  • Costs will abide the outcome of the suit

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • Giella vs Cassman Brown & Co. Ltd [1973] E.A. 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