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

St. James A.C.K Kimilili (Kama Group) v Stanley Barasa & 2 others [2013] KEHC 1997 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 1997 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1997
Citation
[2013] KEHC 1997 (KLR)
Decided
8 October 2013
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLand DisputePostureAppeal from the original trialCoramA. OMOLLO
Holding

The court finds that the plaintiff's claim to plot No. KIM”B”18 is valid and that the defendants' construction on the plaintiff's plot is not justified.

Facts

The plaintiff, St. James A.C.K Kimilili (Kama Group), claims to have been allotted plot No. KIM”B”18, while the defendants, Stanley Barasa, Rodgers Wekesa, and Hezron M. Barasa, claim to have been allotted plots Nos. 60, 61, and 62 in Kimilili Town. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants have begun construction on the plaintiff's plot, which they claim does not exist.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff's claim to plot No. KIM”B”18 is valid.
  2. Whether the defendants' construction on the plaintiff's plot is justified.

Reasoning

The court ruled that the plaintiff was allotted plot No. KIM”B”18 and that the defendants' construction on the plaintiff's plot was not justified due to lack of financial assistance from the defendants.

Outcome

The court granted an injunction restraining the defendants from constructing and interfering with the plaintiff's enjoyment, possession, and occupation of plot No. KIM”B”18.

Orders

  • An injunction restraining the defendants from constructing and interfering with the plaintiff's enjoyment, possession, and occupation of plot No. KIM”B”18.
  • The case was transferred to Kimilili Principal Magistrate court for trial and determination.

Remedies

  • Injunction
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