https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3344

https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3344

The appellant failed to file and serve the record of appeal despite repeated opportunities and adjournments, and the court found the appellant unwilling to prosecute the appeal; the appeal was therefore dismissed under Order 42 rule 35 with costs.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEELC 3344 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Car Wash Den Limited (Suing Through One of the Directors Samuel Kimani Karanja); 1st Respondent: Joseph Mwangi Njoroge; 2nd Respondent: Francis Karanja Njoroge; 3rd Respondent: Stephen Githaiga
Court
Environment and Land Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal E017 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondents and the interested party.
Judges
["MN Gicheru"]
Legal Topics
Dismissal of Appeal, Failure to File Record of Appeal, Want of Prosecution, Order 42 Rule 35 Civil Procedure Rules, Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Environment and Land Law Appellate Procedure Dismissal of Appeal Failure to File Record of Appeal Want of Prosecution Order 42 Rule 35 Civil Procedure Rules Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Car Wash Den Limited (Suing Through One of the Directors Samuel Kimani Karanja)

Appellant

Joseph Mwangi Njoroge

1st Respondent

Francis Karanja Njoroge

2nd Respondent

Stephen Githaiga

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for failure to file and serve the record of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had prosecuted the appeal with due diligence.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to file and serve the record of appeal despite repeated opportunities and adjournments, and the court found the appellant unwilling to prosecute the appeal; the appeal was therefore dismissed under Order 42 rule 35 with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondents and the interested party.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed under Order 42 rule 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  • Costs are awarded to the respondents and the interested party.