[2017] KEELC 2017 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant failed to appear and did not provide any justification for the delay or for not prosecuting the appeal. The respondent, on the other hand, appeared and satisfied the court that the appeal had not been prosecuted. The court was satisfied that proper notice had been served on the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 2017 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: County Council of Meru South; Respondent: Wilfred Marangu Mutwiri
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 25 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Appeals Process, Land Disputes
- 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
County Council of Meru South
Appellant
Wilfred Marangu Mutwiri
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant failed to appear and did not provide any justification for the delay or for not prosecuting the appeal. The respondent, on the other hand, appeared and satisfied the court that the appeal had not been prosecuted. The court was satisfied that proper notice had been served on the parties. In the absence of any explanation or action from the appellant, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, in accordance with the applicable procedural rules.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC [CA] CASE NO 25 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC [CA] CASE NO. 106 OF 2012
COUNTY COUNCIL OF MERU SOUTH...........................APPELLANT
VERSUS
WILFRED MARANGU MUTWIRI..................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Parties were to come to court to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution on 25. 7.2015.
2. I am satisfied that the apposite notice was issued to the parties. However, only the respondent was in court.
3. I find that the respondent has shown to the satisfaction of the court why the appeal should be dismissed. Conversely, I find that the appellant has not shown to the satisfaction of the court why the appeal should NOT be dismissed.
4. In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed.
5. I issue no order as to costs.
6. It is so ordered
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 25th day of July, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Wilfred Marangu Mutwiri -respondent
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE