[2014] KEHC 4859 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 4859 (KLR)

The court found that the application for leave to appeal out of time had not been prosecuted for over a year, and there was no appearance or opposition from the intended appellant. This demonstrated a lack of interest in pursuing the application. To prevent unnecessary delay and abuse of the court process, the court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 4859 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Emarti Ole Narau Group Ranch; Respondent: Sewani Ole Nkushu Naroki; Respondent: Nchosiya Ole Leboi; Respondent: Ntiyani Ole Leponyo; Respondent: Aikanae Ole Sapuru; Respondent: Rancho Ole Mardadi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 50 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
application dismissed for want of prosecution
Judges
LN Mutende
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Leave to Appeal Out of Time Appeal Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emarti Ole Narau Group Ranch

Appellant

Sewani Ole Nkushu Naroki

Respondent

Nchosiya Ole Leboi

Respondent

Ntiyani Ole Leponyo

Respondent

Aikanae Ole Sapuru

Respondent

Rancho Ole Mardadi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the application for leave to appeal out of time should be dismissed for want of prosecution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for leave to appeal out of time had not been prosecuted for over a year, and there was no appearance or opposition from the intended appellant. This demonstrated a lack of interest in pursuing the application. To prevent unnecessary delay and abuse of the court process, the court exercised its discretion to allow the respondents' application and dismissed the pending application for want of prosecution. Costs were awarded to the respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed for want of prosecution

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 25th March, 2013 is dismissed for want of prosecution.
  • Costs of the application shall be to the respondent in any event.