Wainaina v Njii & another (Environment & Land Case E233 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 3541 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to freeze rental income from a disputed Huruma plot, ruling that mandatory orders need exceptional proof before trial.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether an order should issue directing that all rental income generated from the suit land be deposited in a joint interest earning account to be opened in the names of the Defendants' Advocates
- 2.Whether the Plaintiff should provide statements of account of rental proceeds from 1994 to date
Key legal issues
#Whether an interlocutory mandatory injunction should issue directing rental income be banked in a joint account
The application is unmerited; mandatory orders cannot issue at the interlocutory stage absent special circumstances, particularly where ownership is contested between the Defendants and existing injunctions in favour of the Plaintiff remain in force
The court noted the 2nd Defendant admitted the Plaintiff built the permanent structures on the land, and the prayers sought duplicated those in his Counterclaim. The 1st Defendant also claims ownership under a Certificate of Title. Justice Wambwoto had already granted the Plaintiff an interlocutory injunction not appealed against. Both ownership and the rental proceeds question require viva voce evidence at trial. No special circumstances justified a mandatory interlocutory order.
Legal principles established
#- An interlocutory mandatory injunction can only be granted in exceptional and special circumstances, in the clearest of cases, to a higher standard than a prohibitory injunction
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion application dated 26th October 2023 is dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over a dispute relating to land parcel No. 209/11388/40 (I.R. No. 65953)
Relief refused
#Order directing rental income from the suit land to be deposited in a joint interest-earning account in the names of the Defendants' Advocates
Mandatory in nature; no special circumstances shown and matters are in dispute between the Defendants themselves
Order compelling the Plaintiff to release financial records/accounts of rental income from 1994 to date
Falls within prayers in the Counterclaim to be determined at trial after viva voce evidence
Costs
No order as to costs
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
I hence dismiss the Notice of Motion application dated the 26th October, 2023 but with no order as to costs.
I am of the view that the prayers of mandatory injunction being sought by the 2nd Defendant cannot issue at this interlocutory stage as none of the Defendants constructed on the suit land.
since there are no special circumstances to warrant the granting of the mandatory orders as sought, it would be pertinent for viva voce evidence to be adduced
Issues in the judgment
#The land parcel number is inconsistently referenced in the judgment, appearing variously as 'No.2019/11388/40', 'No. 209/11388/40' and 'No. 20/11388/40'
The case title, suit number and neutral citation are not stated in the judgment extract
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wainaina v Njii & another (Environment & Land Case E233 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 3541 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3541/eng@2025-05-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.