[2018] KEELC 3991 (KLR)
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued to the parties. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendants appeared in court to provide reasons or arguments against the dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution. In accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 3991 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Harriet Ciakathiru Mbaka alias Alliet M’Riba; Defendant: James Mbaka; Defendant: Robert Mugambi Mugo; Defendant: Bedford Mutegi M’Mirungu; Defendant: Beatrice Kaari Mutegi; Defendant: Land Registrar Meru; Defendant: The Attorney General
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 240 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / 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, Land Dispute, 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
Harriet Ciakathiru Mbaka alias Alliet M’Riba
Plaintiff
James Mbaka
Defendant
Robert Mugambi Mugo
Defendant
Bedford Mutegi M’Mirungu
Defendant
Beatrice Kaari Mutegi
Defendant
Land Registrar Meru
Defendant
The Attorney General
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / 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(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued to the parties. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendants appeared in court to provide reasons or arguments against the dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution. In accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court determined that the parties failed to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution, as no progress had been made and no justification for delay was provided.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO. 240 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC 153 OF 2014
HARRIET CIAKATHIRU MBAKA alias ALLIET M’RIBA.....…........PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JAMES MBAKA………..…………………......……………….. 1ST DEFENDANT
ROBERT MUGAMBI MUGO…....…………...……………….2ND DEFENDANT
BEDFORD MUTEGI M’MIRUNGU...…...….………………..3RD DEFENDANT
BEATRICE KAARI MUTEGI.………….…….……………….4TH DEFENDANT
LAND REGISTRAR MERU.......................................................5TH DEFENDANT
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL……..….…………..……………6TH DEFENDANT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 15. 03. 2018 to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17 rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, they did not turn up.
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 dismissedfor want of prosecution in terms of order 17 rule 2(1) 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 15th day of March, 2018 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties not in court
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE