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

Shayona Timber Limited v Kenya National Highway Authority [2013] KEHC 445 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 445 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
445
Citation
[2013] KEHC 445 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil SuitPosturePlaintiff seeks a permanent injunction against the defendant to restrain the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's quiet possession of the suit property.CoramL N WAITHAKA
Holding

The court declined to strike the defendant's defense and ordered that the suit be determined on its merits.

Facts

The plaintiff, Shayona Timber Limited, brought a suit against the defendant, Kenya National Highway Authority, seeking a permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's quiet possession of the suit property. The plaintiff also sought to strike out the defendant's defense and enter judgment for the plaintiff as prayed for in the plaint.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant's defense discloses a reasonable defense in law and raises triable issues.
  2. Whether the suit property was compulsorily acquired by the government and whether compensation in respect thereof was paid to the plaintiff and/or its predecessor in title.

Reasoning

The court found that there were some dealings between the plaintiff and persons not parties to the suit, and that the evidence adduced was incapable of adequately addressing the issues arising from the pleadings. The court declined to strike the defense and ordered the suit to be determined on its merits.

Outcome

The plaintiff's application to strike out the defendant's defense was dismissed.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's application to strike out the defendant's defense was dismissed.
  • The suit was ordered to be determined on its merits.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • DT Dobie & Company (Kenya) Ltd V. Muchina
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