[2018] KEELC 3648 (KLR)
The court found that the parties failed to appear and show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution, despite proper notice having been issued. In accordance with order 42 rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 3648 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Esther Mbothi; Respondent: Jacinta Mutani Kirigu
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 86 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Appeals Procedure, 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
Esther Mbothi
Appellant
Jacinta Mutani Kirigu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution under order 42 rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the parties failed to appear and show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution, despite proper notice having been issued. In accordance with order 42 rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution, as no steps had been taken by the parties to advance the appeal.
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 CIVIL APPEAL CASE NO. 123 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC CIVIL APPEAL NO. 86 OF 2013
ESTHER MBOTHI.................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
JACINTA MUTANI KIRIGU.............RESPONDENT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 3. 5.2018 to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 42 rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, they did not turn up. The matter had been listed for dismissal before me.
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 42 rule 35(2) 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 3rd day of May, 2018 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties not in court
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE