[2013] KEHC 5290 (KLR)
The court found that the defendant had been given ample opportunity to file a replying affidavit and to pursue an out of court settlement as indicated by his counsel. Despite these opportunities, the defendant failed to take any steps to oppose the application or to settle the matter. As a result, the application...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 5290 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Charity Kamani Nturili; Plaintiff: Faith Kagendo Owuocha; Defendant: Stephn Karanja
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 138 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Unopposed Application
- Outcome
- Application allowed as unopposed; orders granted in terms of prayers 2, 3, and 5 of the application dated 17th October 2012.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Orders, Unopposed Application, Replying Affidavit, Out of Court Settlement
- 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
Charity Kamani Nturili
Plaintiff
Faith Kagendo Owuocha
Plaintiff
Stephn Karanja
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Unopposed Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs' application dated 17th October 2012 should be allowed in the absence of a replying affidavit from the defendant.
- 2 Whether the defendant's failure to oppose the application or pursue an out of court settlement warrants granting the orders sought.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the defendant had been given ample opportunity to file a replying affidavit and to pursue an out of court settlement as indicated by his counsel. Despite these opportunities, the defendant failed to take any steps to oppose the application or to settle the matter. As a result, the application dated 17th October 2012 remained unopposed. The court exercised its discretion to allow the application, particularly granting prayers 2, 3, and 5 as sought by the plaintiffs, since there was no material before the court to justify refusing the orders. The decision was based on the principle that unopposed applications may be granted where the respondent has been given a fair...
Court Disposition
Application allowed as unopposed; orders granted in terms of prayers 2, 3, and 5 of the application dated 17th October 2012.
Orders
- Orders in terms of prayers 2, 3, and 5 of the application dated 17th October 2012 are granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Meru
Environmental & Land Case 138 of 2012 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; text-autospace:ideograph-other; font-size:12. 0pt;"Liberation Serif","serif";} </style> <![endif]
CHARITY KAMANI NTURILI.............................................................1ST PLAINTIFF
FAITH KAGENDO OWUOCHA........................................................2ND PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
STEPHN KARANJA.............................................................................DEFENDANT
RULING
This matter came for interpartes hearing on 6. 11. 2012. The respondent's advocate said he was not ready to proceed as he had just been instructed and needed time to file a further affidavit. Interim orders were extended up to 28. 11. 2012. Mr. Mutuma for the respondent again was not ready and said that his client had lost a relative and therefore could not execute the replying affidavit. This Court gave him 14 days to file a replying affidavit. Mr. Mutuma also indicated that he had instructions to file an out of Court settlement. The 14 days given to file a replying affidavit was the last chance the court gave him. The matter was fixed for mention today.
Mr. Mutuma has not filed the replying affidavit. He has also not shown any
indications of trying a settlement out of court as he had indicated. It is over 40 days since this application under a certificate of urgency was filed.
I find that the application dated 17th October 2012 has not been opposed. In the circumstances, the application is allowed. More particularly Orders in terms of prayers 2, 3 and 5 are granted.
DATED THIS 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2013 AT MERU.
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE
Read in open Court at Meru this 24th day of January 2013 in the presence of:
Arithi for applicants
Cc. Mutinda
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE