[2020] KEELC 917 (KLR)
The court found that the application to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the appeal lacked merit. The delay between the dismissal of the appeal in July 2015 and the filing of the present application in July 2020 was found to be prolonged and inexcusable. The reasons advanced by the applicant for the delay...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 917 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: David Lilungu Ambeyi; Respondent: James Majengo Murunga
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 16 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- NA Matheka
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Appeal, Service of Notice, Delay and Laches, Land Ownership 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
David Lilungu Ambeyi
Appellant
James Majengo Murunga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dismissal order made on 9th July 2015 for want of prosecution should be set aside.
- 2 Whether the appellant/applicant has provided sufficient reason for the delay in prosecuting the appeal.
- 3 Whether the appeal should be reinstated for hearing and determination on merit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the appeal lacked merit. The delay between the dismissal of the appeal in July 2015 and the filing of the present application in July 2020 was found to be prolonged and inexcusable. The reasons advanced by the applicant for the delay were deemed unacceptable. The court emphasized that it is the duty of the party who initiates proceedings to take steps to progress their case, and justice must be balanced for both parties. The court was not satisfied that justice would be served by reinstating the appeal after such an inordinate delay, and therefore dismissed the application with costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the appeal is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KAKAMEGA
ELCA CASE NO. 16 OF 2020
DAVID LILUNGU AMBEYI .........................APPELLANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
JAMES MAJENGO MURUNGA...................................... RESPONDENT
RULING
The application is dated 2nd July 2020 and is brought under order 12 rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules and sections 3 and 3A of the Civil procedure Act seeking the following orders;
1. That the application herein be heard on priority basis.
2. That the dismissal order made on 9th July, 2015 dismissing the appellant/applicant’s appeal for want of prosecution be set aside.
3. That the appellant’s appeal be reinstated for hearing and determination on merit.
4. That the costs of this application be in the cause.
It is based on the affidavit of David Lilungu Ambeyi and grounds that the appeal was dismissed on 9th July, 2015 for warrant of prosecution. The notice for dismissal of the appeal was not served on the appellant or his advocates on record to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. The notice for dismissal of the appeal was erroneously addressed to the respondent in person yet he had an advocate on record. The appellant has been condemned unheard when the appeal was ready for hearing. The appellant is still the registered owner of the suit land which is the subject matter in the appeal. Unless the appeal is heard and determined on merit, the appellant shall suffer irreparable loss and damages. The dispute between the parties will remain unresolved and may likely escalate in unending disputes. It is in the interest of justice that the orders sought be granted.
The respondents opposed the application stating that the delay in filing the application is inordinate. That nothing barred the applicant from prosecuting the appeal and he cannot blame his advocate.
This court has considered the application and the submissions therein. The applicant submitted that the notice for dismissal of the appeal was not served on the appellant or his advocates on record to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. I have looked at the court record and find that this suit was dismissed on 9th July 2015. It was not until the 2nd July 2020 when this application was filed. This is an old matter of 2011. Reasons advanced why this application should be granted are unacceptable.
In the case of Utalii Transport Company Ltd & 3 Others vs NIC Bank & Another (2014) eKLR, the court held that it is the primary duty of the plaintiffs to take steps to progress their case since they are the ones who dragged the defendant to court. The decision on whether the suit should be reinstated for trial is a matter of justice and it depends on the facts of the case. In Ivita v Kyumbu (1984) KLR 441, Chesoni J as he then was, stated that the test is whether the delay is prolonged and inexcusable and if justice will be done despite the delay. Justice is justice for both the plaintiff and the defendant. I find this application has no merit and I dismiss it with costs.
It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA THIS 27TH OCTOBER 2020.
N.A. MATHEKA
JUDGE