[2018] KEELC 3326 (KLR)
The court found that the appeal had been pending since 2012 without any steps taken to prosecute it. No satisfactory explanation was provided by the appellant for the delay or absence. In accordance with Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 3326 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Edward Ndeke Njagi; Respondent: Linet Kangai Mukuru
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal 118 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, Costs Award
- 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
Edward Ndeke Njagi
Appellant
Linet Kangai Mukuru
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 under Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- 2 Whether any satisfactory explanation was provided for the delay in prosecuting the appeal.
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appeal had been pending since 2012 without any steps taken to prosecute it. No satisfactory explanation was provided by the appellant for the delay or absence. In accordance with Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and awarded costs to the respondent.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- Costs are awarded to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CIVIL APPEAL CASE NO. 118 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC CIVIL APPEAL CASE NO. 12 OF 2012
EDWARD NDEKE NJAGI.............................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
LINET KANGAI MUKURU.......................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. A Notice was properly issued informing the parties that this suit would be listed for dismissal before me on 17th May, 2018 in terms of the provision contained in Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
2. The ex-parte applicant was not in court. Miss Njenga, for the respondent, urged the court to dismiss the appeal with costs to the Respondent. She pointed out that the suit has been pending prosecution since 2012 when it was filed.
3. I find that no satisfactory explanation has been given to the court as to why the suit should not be dismissed.
4. This suit is, therefore, dismissed.
5. Costs are awarded to the Respondent.
6. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open Court at Chuka this 17th day of May, 2018
in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Miss Jackline Njenga for the Respondent
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE