Judgment[2023] KEHC 26692
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: FamilySuccession Cause
It was submitted that there is a dispute regarding ownership of the suit properties. That under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, where there is proof that any property in dispute is in a danger of being wasted, damaged, alienated or disposed of, the court ought to grant a temporary injunction to restrain such acts.
Division and case type: Environment and LandLand Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MALINDI MISC. E13 OF 2020 ATLANTIS KENYA LIMITED......APPLICANT VERSUS CHEBUSWA LIMITED...............RESPONDENT Coram: Hon.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsConstitutional Petition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MALINDI MISC. E13 OF 2020 ATLANTIS KENYA LIMITED......APPLICANT VERSUS CHEBUSWA LIMITED...............RESPONDENT Coram: Hon.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL DIVISION COURT MARTIAL CRIMINAL APPEAL 5 Of 2016. 87058 SPTE ALLAN OMONDI ANYANGA................APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC.........................................................................RESPONDENT.
Division and case type: Environment and LandLand Case
That this Honourable Court be pleased to revive this suit which abated by this Court's order on 2nd July, 2012. That this Honourable Court be pleased to retain the Inhibition Order lodged upon the suit land and to restrain the Defendant from wasting, cutting trees and/or vegetation or anything growing on the suit premises and from harassing the Applicant or the heirs or Dependants of the late Plaintiff until the determination of this suit.
Division and case type: FamilySuccession Cause
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 79 OF 2007 ANNE KENDI MBAYA............................................................................................PETITIONER VERSUS JONATHAN M’NKANATA M’MUGWIKA............................................................OBJECTOR R U L I N G This is an application by petitioner Anne Kendi Mbaya brought under Section 47 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU HCCA NO. 72 OF 2004 A F ………………………………………………………… PLAINTIFF VERSUS H A …………………………………..…………..
Division and case type: CivilMiscellaneous Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU HCCA NO. 72 OF 2004 A F ………………………………………………………… PLAINTIFF VERSUS H A …………………………………..…………..
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 250 OF 1993 JOHN MWOBOBIA ……...........................…..APPELLANT VERSUS CHILDREN OFFICER MERU……............…..RESPONDENT (From the original conviction and sentence in P&D No 7 of 1992 of DM II’s Court at Meru)
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
For the above reasons I allow this appeal, set aside the judgment and orders of the court below and order that the matter be re-tried by a magistrate with requisite monetary jurisdiction either in Nyeri or Nairobi. I entertain no doubts that the parties who have shown a keen interest in the disposal of the matter shall intimate to the deputy registrar of this Court where they next want to be heard.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MERU CIVIL CASE NO 390 OF 1992(OS) KIBUNDI …………….…………….… PLAINTIFF VERSUS MUKOBWA & ANOTHER ….….... DEFENDANT RULING This is a preliminary question as to whether, by reason of the determination of the originating summons by the High Court, in the High Court Civil Case No 2411 of 1979 (OS), at Nairobi, the instant originating summons, which was also started at Nairobi but in due course was transferred here, is barred by the application of the doctrine of
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
There is no difficulty in complying with an order to that effect. It was a prayer for an order allowing the applicant to manifest her religion by doing a specific and clear act, namely, wearing her headscarf.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
have the ex-parte judgment set aside and in consequence all subsequent orders including the order appealed against are nullified. The appeal must be allowed.” It follows therefore, that the exparte judgment of 29th of April, 1991 was entered against the 2nd defendant/respondent, Mwika in error.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU Civil Case 215 of 1990 M’IKUNYUA IBARI STEPHEN KIJOGI IBARI………………………….PLAINTIFFS versus NKANATA M’IBARI……………...…....……..……DEFENDANT 28/1/91 Coram: SO Oguk – judge Plaintiff in person Defendant - absent Court Interpreter – Murungi
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU CIVIL CASE NO 26 OF 1990 MURUNGI NKAMBI …. … PLAINTIFF versus DAVID M’ABURI … ….
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
On the prepondrance of evidence before me as a whole, I cannot help reaching the inescapable conclusion on such evidence, that the 2nd Defendant was not an innocent purchaser for value of the shit land. I am satisfied that it has been established on a balance of probabilities that he was very much aware when he entered into a written agreement with the 1st Defendant (Exhibit A) on the 5th of October, 1987 for the purchase of the suit land that the said land had then been sold to the Plaintiff wh