R U L I N G
The Application
Trimborn Agricultural Engineering Limited (hereinafter referred to as the applicant) has come to court against Maraga group Ltd hereinafter referred to as the respondent vide application dated 20th November 2025 seeking orders that this Honorable Court be pleased to direct/order that the illegal occupants on the suit L.R Nakuru Municipality Block 4/296 and L.R Nakuru Municipality Block4/297 be evicted and vacate the suit land immediately in line with the Orders of this Court issued on the 8th April, 2025.
This Honorable Court be pleased to direct immediate demolition of all the illegal structures erected on the suit properties L.R Nakuru Municipality Block4/297 in line with the Orders of this Court issued on the 8th April, 2025 for having been developed in contravention with the Orders of this Court issued on 3rd July, 2023.
This Honorable Court be pleased to direct the Officer Commanding Police Division Nakuru Area, and the to provide police escort to the firm of Legacy Auctioneering Services for purposes of peace and order during the process of eviction of the illegal occupants and demolition of the illegal permanent structures on the suit properties in execution of the Orders of this Court issued on the 8th April, 2025. Costs of this application be borne by the 2nd Defendant/Respondent.
The application is based on grounds that this Honorable Court made orders on the 8th April, 2025 couched in the following terms:
1. That the 2nd Defendant be and is hereby found guilty of contempt of Court.
2. That the 2nd Defendant is hereby ordered to purge the contempt within fifteen (15) days.
3. That the 2nd Defendant is hereby ordered to pay a fine of failure of which the 2nd Defendant's proper worth fThat for Clarity, the above cited orders were issued by the Honorable Court consequent to the 1st Defendant's/Applicant's Application dated 12th February, 2025 which successfully culminated into a finding of contempt against the 2nd Defendant regarding the status quo orders issued by the Court on 3rd July, 2023. The direction to purge the contempt required the 2nd Defendant herein to demolish all the illegal structures it had erected on the suit properties,
That the 2nd Defendant/Respondent has since the date of the aforesaid orders cited hereinabove, in total breach of these orders, failed to purge the contempt within the prescribed timelines, fifteen (15) days by failing, declining and/or refusing to demolish and put down all the permanent structures erected and/or constructed on the suit land known land L.R Nakuru Municipality Block 4/296 And L.R Nakuru/Municipality Block4/297.
That the Applicant herein has instructed the firm of Legacy Auctioneering Services to carry out enforcement of the above cited Court's Orders. That the said firm of Legacy Auctioneering Services instructed to carry out the enforcement of the above cited Court Orders is unable to discharge its legal mandate/duty/instructions without the help/assistance of police thereby rendering this application a perforce.
That in the circumstances, the Applicant herein and the said firm of Legacy Auctioneering Services require this Honorable Court's intervention by way of an order.
The application is supported by the affidavit of Omari James Makora that reiterates the grounds of the application in the replying affidavit.
The Responce
The respondent states that the main lessee, who was the principal tenant in occupation, formally notified the Respondent that he had vacated the premises, and has since filed his own proceedings seeking compensation for the termination of his tenancy. Following his exit, the Respondent undertook immediate steps to ensure compliance by issuing formal notices to all subtenants demanding that they vacate the premises.
Despite these actions, three of those former subtenants filed a reference before the Business Premises Rent Tribunal (BPRT), claiming statutory protections.
In Nakuru BPRT Case No. E151 of 2025, the Tribunal issued preservation orders protecting the said occupants from eviction pending the determination of their reference. The Respondent is consequently prohibited by law from removing the said persons until the Tribunal determines otherwise. The respondent contends that it is therefore wholly misplaced, unfair, and legally untenable for the Applicant to impute non-compliance upon the Respondent when the continued presence of those individuals is under the express protection of a statutory tribunal.
Analysis and Determination
I have considered the application, the response and the submissions on record and find the respondent was found by this court in contempt of the court and was fined Ksh 2,000,000, failure of which his property worth Ksh 2,000,000 was to be attached and sold and was further ordered to purge the contempt by demolishing the structures on the land. The orders are still in force and there is no evidence that, either the fine was paid or the respondent’s property was sold. The evidence on record shows that the property has tenants of the respondent occupying the structures on the land. These tenants have gone to the tribunal and filed a reference NO Nakuru E151 of 2025. It is evident that the sub-tenants obtained orders preserving status quo thus pre-empting any eviction. There is no evidence that the said orders have been set aside or have lapsed.
This court cannot sanction the disobedience of an order issued by another judicial body the Business Premises Rent Tribunal as the same is a lawful order. The applicant should await the determination of the reference no E151 of 2025 before the Tribunal. The application is disallowed with no orders as to costs.
The Application
Trimborn Agricultural Engineering Limited (hereinafter referred to as the applicant) has come to court against Maraga group Ltd hereinafter referred to as the respondent vide application dated 20th November 2025 seeking orders that this Honorable Court be pleased to direct/order that the illegal occupants on the suit L.R Nakuru Municipality Block 4/296 and L.R Nakuru Municipality Block4/297 be evicted and vacate the suit land immediately in line with the Orders of this Court issued on the 8th April, 2025.
This Honorable Court be pleased to direct immediate demolition of all the illegal structures erected on the suit properties L.R Nakuru Municipality Block4/297 in line with the Orders of this Court issued on the 8th April, 2025 for having been developed in contravention with the Orders of this Court issued on 3rd July, 2023.
This Honorable Court be pleased to direct the Officer Commanding Police Division Nakuru Area, and the to provide police escort to the firm of Legacy Auctioneering Services for purposes of peace and order during the process of eviction of the illegal occupants and demolition of the illegal permanent structures on the suit properties in execution of the Orders of this Court issued on the 8th April, 2025. Costs of this application be borne by the 2nd Defendant/Respondent.
The application is based on grounds that this Honorable Court made orders on the 8th April, 2025 couched in the following terms:
1. That the 2nd Defendant be and is hereby found guilty of contempt of Court.
2. That the 2nd Defendant is hereby ordered to purge the contempt within fifteen (15) days.
3. That the 2nd Defendant is hereby ordered to pay a fine of failure of which the 2nd Defendant's proper worth fThat for Clarity, the above cited orders were issued by the Honorable Court consequent to the 1st Defendant's/Applicant's Application dated 12th February, 2025 which successfully culminated into a finding of contempt against the 2nd Defendant regarding the status quo orders issued by the Court on 3rd July, 2023. The direction to purge the contempt required the 2nd Defendant herein to demolish all the illegal structures it had erected on the suit properties,
That the 2nd Defendant/Respondent has since the date of the aforesaid orders cited hereinabove, in total breach of these orders, failed to purge the contempt within the prescribed timelines, fifteen (15) days by failing, declining and/or refusing to demolish and put down all the permanent structures erected and/or constructed on the suit land known land L.R Nakuru Municipality Block 4/296 And L.R Nakuru/Municipality Block4/297.
That the Applicant herein has instructed the firm of Legacy Auctioneering Services to carry out enforcement of the above cited Court's Orders. That the said firm of Legacy Auctioneering Services instructed to carry out the enforcement of the above cited Court Orders is unable to discharge its legal mandate/duty/instructions without the help/assistance of police thereby rendering this application a perforce.
That in the circumstances, the Applicant herein and the said firm of Legacy Auctioneering Services require this Honorable Court's intervention by way of an order.
The application is supported by the affidavit of Omari James Makora that reiterates the grounds of the application in the replying affidavit.
The Responce
The respondent states that the main lessee, who was the principal tenant in occupation, formally notified the Respondent that he had vacated the premises, and has since filed his own proceedings seeking compensation for the termination of his tenancy. Following his exit, the Respondent undertook immediate steps to ensure compliance by issuing formal notices to all subtenants demanding that they vacate the premises.
Despite these actions, three of those former subtenants filed a reference before the Business Premises Rent Tribunal (BPRT), claiming statutory protections.
In Nakuru BPRT Case No. E151 of 2025, the Tribunal issued preservation orders protecting the said occupants from eviction pending the determination of their reference. The Respondent is consequently prohibited by law from removing the said persons until the Tribunal determines otherwise. The respondent contends that it is therefore wholly misplaced, unfair, and legally untenable for the Applicant to impute non-compliance upon the Respondent when the continued presence of those individuals is under the express protection of a statutory tribunal.
Analysis and Determination
I have considered the application, the response and the submissions on record and find the respondent was found by this court in contempt of the court and was fined Ksh 2,000,000, failure of which his property worth Ksh 2,000,000 was to be attached and sold and was further ordered to purge the contempt by demolishing the structures on the land. The orders are still in force and there is no evidence that, either the fine was paid or the respondent’s property was sold. The evidence on record shows that the property has tenants of the respondent occupying the structures on the land. These tenants have gone to the tribunal and filed a reference NO Nakuru E151 of 2025. It is evident that the sub-tenants obtained orders preserving status quo thus pre-empting any eviction. There is no evidence that the said orders have been set aside or have lapsed.
This court cannot sanction the disobedience of an order issued by another judicial body the Business Premises Rent Tribunal as the same is a lawful order. The applicant should await the determination of the reference no E151 of 2025 before the Tribunal. The application is disallowed with no orders as to costs.