[2017] KEHC 7737 (KLR)
The court found that proper notice to show cause was issued to the parties as required under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Despite the notice, neither the plaintiff nor the defendants provided any satisfactory reason or cause to prevent the dismissal of the suit. The plaintiff's advocate only...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 7737 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Anderson Karani Kanampiu; Defendant: Dorothy Kanyamu Silas; Defendant: Mary Kaari Micheni; Defendant: Mary Njeri Kima
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 46 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Environment Case / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 17 Rule 2, Notice to Show Cause, Case Management
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Anderson Karani Kanampiu
Plaintiff
Dorothy Kanyamu Silas
Defendant
Mary Kaari Micheni
Defendant
Mary Njeri Kima
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Environment Case / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- 2 Whether proper notice to show cause was given to the parties as required by law.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that proper notice to show cause was issued to the parties as required under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Despite the notice, neither the plaintiff nor the defendants provided any satisfactory reason or cause to prevent the dismissal of the suit. The plaintiff's advocate only requested more time to comply with pre-trial procedures and did not address the core issue of showing cause. The court noted that the last step in the matter was taken over a year prior and that the plaintiff's advocate had previously indicated difficulty in tracing his client. In the absence of any substantive steps or explanation, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the...
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO.46 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC CASE NO. 26 OF 2014
ANDERSON KARANI KANAMPIU..........................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
DOROTHY KANYAMU SILAS.......................1ST DEFENDANT
MARY KAARI MICHENI................................2ND DEFENDANT
MARY NJERI KIMA.......................................3RD DEFENDANT
RULING
1. The parties were properly given Notice to come to court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed in terms of Order 17 rule 2 (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
2. The apposite Notice was dated 3rd February, 2017.
3. Cause was to be shown on 15th February, 2017.
4. On 15th February, 2017, the defendants or their advocates did not turn up. Mr. David Gichuki held brief for D. J. Mbaya, the plaintiff’s advocate. He told the court that the parties were praying for 30 days to comply with order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules. He did not address the court with regard to the parties showing cause why this suit should not be dismissed.
5. I do note that on 30th July, 2015 when the parties were last in court, Muthomi, holding brief for D.J. Mbaya, the plaintiff’s advocate, told the court that Mr Mbaya could not trace his client.
6. Order 17 rule 2(1) decrees that in any suit in which no application has been made or step taken by either party for one year, the court may give notice to the parties to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed and if cause is not shown to its satisfaction, the court may dismiss the suit.
7. I am satisfied that notice was properly given for the parties to come to court to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed in terms of Order 17 Rule 2 (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
8. No cause has been shown to the satisfaction of the court that this suit should not be dismissed. The suit is, therefore, dismissed.
9. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 22nd day of February, 2017 in the presence of:
CA – Ndegwa
Gichoki for DJ Mbaya for the plaintiff
Defendants - absent
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE