[2017] KEELC 3063 (KLR)
The court found that neither the petitioner nor his advocate appeared in court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The respondent supported the dismissal. As no cause was shown, the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules and dismissed...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 3063 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Francis Johnson Kaburu; Respondent: Fredrick G. Nkonge
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 08 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
Francis Johnson Kaburu
Applicant
Fredrick G. Nkonge
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 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that neither the petitioner nor his advocate appeared in court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The respondent supported the dismissal. As no cause was shown, the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules and dismissed the suit for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- This suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA MISC JR CASE NO. 08 OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF CHUKA SUCCESSION NO. 274 OF 2011
FORMERLY MERU MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL CASE NO. 84 OF 2012
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF M’BIRISI MAETI (DECEASED)
FRANCIS JOHNSON KABURU………………………..PETITIONER
VERSUS
FREDRICK G. NKONGE……..…….………….....……RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Parties were to come to court on 15. 3.2017 to show why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
2. The petitioner and his advocate were not in court.
3. Mr. Kiongo for the AG told the court that he supported dismissal of the suit.
4. I find that the parties have not shown cause why the suit should not be dismissed.
5. In the circumstances, this suit is dismissed.
6. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 15th day of March, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Kiongo for the AG for Apposite respondents.
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE