[2016] KEHC 6912 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had failed to comply with previous court orders and did not attend the hearing. The absence of the plaintiff and the lack of cooperation from the other defendants, except the 1st defendant, justified the dismissal of the suit under Order 12 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 6912 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: George Gitau Gatuma; Defendant: James Muchene Gatuma; Defendant: Registrar of Lands; Defendant: Hon. Attorney General; Defendant: The Board Member of the Church of Restoration (Mutuini)
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 373 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Judgment
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for non-attendance and non-compliance with court orders
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Nonattendance, Civil Procedure Rules, Costs Award, 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
George Gitau Gatuma
Plaintiff
James Muchene Gatuma
Defendant
Registrar of Lands
Defendant
Hon. Attorney General
Defendant
The Board Member of the Church of Restoration (Mutuini)
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for non-attendance by the plaintiff and other defendants.
- 2 Whether costs should be awarded to the 1st defendant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had failed to comply with previous court orders and did not attend the hearing. The absence of the plaintiff and the lack of cooperation from the other defendants, except the 1st defendant, justified the dismissal of the suit under Order 12 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court emphasized the need for parties to cooperate with the court to ensure timely dispensation of justice. As the 1st defendant was the only party present and had no counterclaim, the court dismissed the suit and awarded costs to the 1st defendant only.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for non-attendance and non-compliance with court orders
Orders
- The suit is dismissed under Order 12 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Costs awarded to the 1st defendant only.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NAIROBI
ELC CASE NO. 373 OF 2008
GEORGE GITAU GATUMA …………………..............……………………PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JAMES MUCHENE GATUMA……..............……1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
REGISTRAR OF LANDS………….............…….2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL……...........…...….3RD DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
THE BOARD MEMBER OF THE CHURCH
OF RESTORATION (MUTUINI)….......…........…..4TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
On 25/5/2015, the parties were directed to fully comply with order 3, 7 and 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules within 60 days. Hearing was fixed for today, 25/1/2016. When the matter came up for hearing only the 1st Defendant was in court.
This suit was filed way back in the year 2008 7 years ago. This case illustrates why the public perceives the Judiciary as a veritable natural procrastinator of delivery of justice. Clearly in this case the Plaintiff’s conduct does not evince co-operation with the court so that justice can be dispensed timeously. It is also clear that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants, who are also not in court today, have not helped the situation.
In this suit, the 1st Defendant has no counter claim. The other Defendants are absent. In terms of the provisions of Order 12 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, I dismiss this suit.
I award costs to the 1st Defendant only.
It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Nairobi this 25th day of January, 2016 in the presence of: -
Court clerk – Daniel
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE