Saima Jepkemboi v National Lands Commission,Secretary Lands Ministry of Lands & Physical Planning,Chief Lands Registrar,Director Survey of Kenya,Attorney General,Weston Kipkosgei Lagat & Faith Limo [2017] KEELC 1916 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE ENVIRONMENT &  LAND COURT OF KENYA

AT MILIMANI

ELC CASE NO. 23 OF 2017

SAIMA JEPKEMBOI …………………….…….....PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

=VERSUS=

THE NATIONAL LANDS COMMISSION..1ST DEFENDNT/RESPONDENT

THE SECRETARY LANDS MINISTRY OF LANDS &

PHYSICAL PLANNING………………...2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

THE CHIEF LANDS REGISTRAR…....3RD DEFENDANT/RESPONDENTS

THE DIRECTOR SURVEY OF KENYA....4TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

THE HON.ATTORNEY GENERAL........5TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENTS

WESTON KIPKOSGEI LAGAT…...........6TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

FAITH LIMO………………………..........7TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

RULING

1. This is a ruling in respect of two separate applications filed by the Plaintiff/Applicant. The first one is dated 10th January 2017. This application seeks injunctive orders against the respondents. The applicant contends that she was allocated a plot along Masaba Road near Nyayo Stadium in 1996. This is after she applied for the same and all approvals necessary were granted. A deed plan was duly prepared. She however later learnt that the same plot is being fraudulently allocated to the sixth and seventh respondents.

2. The second application is dated 26th January 2017. It seeks injunctive orders and police assistance. The sixth and seventh respondents who were served by way of substituted service neither entered appearance nor filed a replying affidavit or grounds of opposition to the two applications. Counsel for the first respondents indicated to court on 4th April 2017 that as the first respondent was not adversely affected by the two applications, they did not wish to participate in the same. Counsel for the second, third, fourth and fifth respondents also indicated on 4th April 2017 that he was not opposed to the two applications.

3. From the materials presented by the applicant and given the fact that the applications are not opposed, I find that the applicant has a prima facie case. I therefore allow the applicant’s notice of motion dated 10th January 2017, in terms of prayers three (3), four (4) five (5) and six (6). The notice of motion dated 26th January, 2017 is allowed in terms of prayers three (3), four (4), six (6), and nine (9).

It is so ordered.

Dated, Signed and delivered at Nairobi on this 21stday of September, 2017.

E.O.OBAGA

JUDGE

In the presence of :

Mr Kassim for Plaintiff

Court Assistant: Hilda

E.O.OBAGA

JUDGE