Adongo & another v Adongo & another (Environment and Land Case E002 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 2305 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Siaya court refused most interim orders in a family land dispute but froze the land register, blocking any sale or transfer until the case is decided.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Prima facie case for temporary injunction
The applicants failed to establish a prima facie case with a probability of success
Applying Giella v Cassman Brown and Mrao v First American Bank, the court held that although the applicants claimed customary trust, adverse possession and an illegal subdivision, these are matters ascertainable only after a full hearing. The 1st respondent produced a title deed dated 21/5/2020 and a green card showing registration since 1983, so at interlocutory stage the title was prima facie evidence of ownership, and the applicants' occupation was contested.
Irreparable harm and alleged mining waste
The evidence of alleged unregulated gold mining was not persuasive
The court compared the annexed photographs with the applicants' description of deep pits, removal of topsoil and destruction of crops and found the description and magnitude did not match what the photos depicted. No letter of complaint to the relevant authorities about the alleged illegal mining had been produced.
Balance of convenience and preservation of the suit property
The balance of convenience favoured securing the registers by inhibition rather than granting injunctions
The respondent held title and did not deny undertaking economic activities on the land. Given the claim for adverse possession and trust, the court found the property should be secured so it remains within the court's reach should the applicants' claim succeed. An inhibition restricting registration of dispositions on both subdivisions was the appropriate preservation order under section 13 of the ELC Act.
Legal principles established
#- At an interlocutory stage a certificate of title is prima facie evidence of ownership and the court should not delve into the merits of claims such as trust or adverse possession.
- Declaratory orders declaring a subdivision illegal and directing registration of proprietors cannot be granted at interlocutory stage.
Court orders
#- 1.Prayers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Notice of Motion dated 26/01/2026 are declined
- 2.An order of inhibition is issued pending hearing and determination of the main suit, restricting the registration of any disposition in the registers of land parcels Siaya/Abom/4199 and Siaya/Abom/4200 (formerly Siaya/Abom/669)
- 3.All the parties are bonded to keep the peace
- 4.Costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the main suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act; Order 40 Rules 1, 2, 3 and Sections 1A, 1B, 3A of the Civil Procedure Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Adongo & another v Adongo & another (Environment and Land Case E002 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 2305 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of Motion dated 26/01/2026 (E&L Suit, Siaya). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2305/eng@2026-04-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.