[2016] KEELC 1233 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was not present on the day fixed for hearing the application and there was no evidence that the respondent had been served. In the absence of service and the applicant's non-attendance, the court deemed it necessary to dismiss the application. The court exercised its discretion to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEELC 1233 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Celina Karea Muria; Defendant: Aloise Muriati Thiringi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 92 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Removal of Caution, Case Management, Land Title Restrictions
- 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
Celina Karea Muria
Plaintiff
Aloise Muriati Thiringi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
- 2 Whether cautions, inhibitions, or restrictions on parcel NTIMA/IGOKI/1022 should be removed.
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the defendant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was not present on the day fixed for hearing the application and there was no evidence that the respondent had been served. In the absence of service and the applicant's non-attendance, the court deemed it necessary to dismiss the application. The court exercised its discretion to ensure fairness and adherence to procedural requirements, particularly the necessity of service and presence for the hearing of applications.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
IN THE ENVIROMENT AND LAND COURT
CIVIL SUIT NO. 92 OF 2011(O.S)
CELINA KAREA MURIA.............................PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
ALOISE MURIATI THIRINGI........................DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
R U L I N G
This application was brought to Court by a way of a Certificate of Urgency. It seeks orders:-
THATthe suit against the Defendant herein be dismissed with costs for want of prosecution.
THATthe Honourable Court be pleased to order for removal of all cautions, inhibition and or restriction placed on parcel No. NTIMA/IGOKI/1022.
THATthe cost of this application and the entire suit be awarded to the Defendant.
The application is supported by the Affidavit of the Applicant. It has proffered one ground as follows:-
THATthe Plaintiff has neglected and/or otherwise filed to set the suit down for hearing and/or failed to take any steps to prosecute the same as the matter was lastly in Court on the 19th day of March, 2013.
The Applicant was not in Court on the day the Court fixed for the hearing of the application. There is no evidence that the Respondent had been served.
I deem it necessary to have this application dismissed. I therefore, dismiss it.
Costs shall be in the cause.
It is so ordered .
Delivered in Open Court at Meru this 15th day of March, 2016 in the presence of:
CC: Daniel/ Lilian
Parties not present
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE