[2024] KEHC 7170 (KLR)
The court found that neither party nor their counsel appeared to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The absence of any explanation or representation, coupled with a consistent pattern of non-appearance since June 2022, demonstrated a lack of interest in prosecuting the case....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 7170 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: James Njoroge Gaikia; Respondent: Peter Gatu Njuguna; Respondent: Samuel Njenga Kamau
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kiambu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application E114 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- DO Chepkwony
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Case Management, Order 17 Rule 2, Failure to Prosecute
- 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
James Njoroge Gaikia
Applicant
Peter Gatu Njuguna
Respondent
Samuel Njenga Kamau
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 party nor their counsel appeared to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The absence of any explanation or representation, coupled with a consistent pattern of non-appearance since June 2022, demonstrated a lack of interest in prosecuting the case. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution as provided for under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Gaikia v Njuguna & another (Miscellaneous Application E114 of 2021) [2024] KEHC 7170 (KLR) (30 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 7170 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kiambu
Miscellaneous Application E114 of 2021
DO Chepkwony, J
May 30, 2024
Between
James Njoroge Gaikia
Applicant
and
Peter Gatu Njuguna
1st Respondent
Samuel Njenga Kamau
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. This matter is for mention for parties to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. There is no appearance by either party and or their respective counsel. There is no representation to explain their absence.
2. This has been the trend since 15th June, 2022 when the matter was fixed for mention on 14th July, 2022. It is clear that the parties have lost interest in having this case prosecuted; a result of which the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution as provided for under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
It is so ordered.
RULING DATED AND SIGNED AT KIAMBU THIS 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2024. D. O. CHEPKWONYJUDGEIn the presence of:No appearance for and by either partiesCourt Assistant - Martin