[2017] KEELC 219 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff's advocate failed to attend court to prosecute the application for inhibition orders and did not provide any excuse for the absence. As a result, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the application for non-prosecution. Consequently, the interim orders previously granted...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 219 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Canisio Micheni Thambo; Defendant: Domisiano Murungi Thambo; Defendant: Genesio Mwenda Murungi; Defendant: Doris Wanja Murungi; Defendant: Nancy Kaari Murungi; Defendant: Pamela Gakii Murungi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 209 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition
- Outcome
- application dismissed for non-prosecution; interim orders vacated
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Inhibition Orders, Interlocutory Applications, Eviction Threats
- 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
Canisio Micheni Thambo
Plaintiff
Domisiano Murungi Thambo
Defendant
Genesio Mwenda Murungi
Defendant
Doris Wanja Murungi
Defendant
Nancy Kaari Murungi
Defendant
Pamela Gakii Murungi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Inhibition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff's application for inhibition orders restraining dealings in the suit land should be granted pending hearing and determination of the suit.
- 2 Whether the application should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the plaintiff's advocate's non-attendance.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff's advocate failed to attend court to prosecute the application for inhibition orders and did not provide any excuse for the absence. As a result, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the application for non-prosecution. Consequently, the interim orders previously granted were vacated. The court emphasized the importance of diligent prosecution of applications and adherence to procedural rules.
Court Disposition
application dismissed for non-prosecution; interim orders vacated
Orders
- The application dated 9th October, 2017 is dismissed for non-prosecution.
- Interim orders granted on 11th October, 2017 are vacated.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT OF KENYA
AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO 209 OF 2017
CANISIO MICHENI THAMBO...................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
DOMISIANO MURUNGI THAMBO.................1ST DEFENDANT
GENESIO MWENDA MURUNGI.....................2ND DEFENDANT
DORIS WANJA MURUNGI...............................3RD DEFENDANT
NANCY KAARI MURUNGI..............................4TH DEFENDANT
PAMELA GAKII MURUNGI.............................5TH DEFENDANT
RULING
1. This application is dated 9th October, 2017. It seeks orders:
1. That this application be certified as urgent.
2. That the honourable court be pleased to issue order of inhibition restraining any kind of dealings in land parcel MWIMBI/CENTRAL MAGUTUNI/227 pending the hearing of his application.
3. That the honourable court be pleased to issue order of inhibition restraining any kind of dealings in land parcel MWIMBI/CENTRAL MAGUTUNI/227 pending the hearing and determination of this suit.
4. That cost of this application be provided for.
2. The application has the following grounds:
1. That the defendants are threatening to evict the plaintiff and sell the suit land.
2. That the plaintiff children as well as the defendants live on the said parcel.
3. That if the plaintiff is evicted from the suit land he has been in possession and occupation for all his life he stands to be rendered destitute and suffer great loss and damage.
4. That the defendants would not be prejudiced by the said order.
3. On 11. 10. 2017, interim orders were granted at exparte stage. Parties were ordered to come to court for hearing interpartes.
4. On 19. 10. 2017, the plaintiff’s advocate did not attend court. The defendant/respondent was represented by advocate Muthomi. Mr. Muthomi asked the court to dismiss the application for non-prosecution.
5. I note that the plaintiff’s advocate did not offer any excuse for not attending court to prosecute the application.
6. In the circumstances, the application is dismissed. Interim orders granted vide this court’s ruling delivered on 11th October, 2017 are vacated.
7. Costs shall be in the cause.
8. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 19th day of October, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Muthomi for Defendant/Respondent
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE