[2017] KEELC 662 (KLR)
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued to the parties. Neither the applicants nor the respondent appeared in court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. In accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court determined that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 662 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Daniel Mwanze Mwendwa & 3 Others; Respondent: Jackson Muthengi Nyaga
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 12 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 17 Rule 2, Case Management
- 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
Daniel Mwanze Mwendwa & 3 Others
Applicant
Jackson Muthengi Nyaga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued to the parties. Neither the applicants nor the respondent appeared in court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. In accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court determined that the parties had failed to take any steps to prosecute the matter and had not provided any justification for the delay. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- It is so ordered.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION CASE NO. 12 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION CASE NO. 36 OF 2014
DANIEL MWANZE MWENDWA & 3 OTHERS..………...……APPLICANTS
VERSUS
JACKSON MUTHENGI NYAGA……………..……....................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 20. 12. 2017 to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17 rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, they did not turn up.
2. I am satisfied that the apposite Notice was properly issued.
3. I find that the parties have failed to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17rule 2 (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
The suit, therefore, merits dismissal.
4. The suit is dismissed.
5. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 20th day of December, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties not in court
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE