[2017] KEHC 7819 (KLR)
The court found that proper notice to show cause had been issued to the parties as required by Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendants appeared in court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed. The absence of any action or explanation from the parties led...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 7819 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Harriet Muthomi Mugambi; Defendant: Geoffrey Mugambi; Defendant: Nyaga M. Karugutira; Defendant: Charles Kinoti; Defendant: Kariba Kithinji; Defendant: Mutembei Kanampiu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 45 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Environment Case / 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, Land Disputes
- 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 Muthomi Mugambi
Plaintiff
Geoffrey Mugambi
Defendant
Nyaga M. Karugutira
Defendant
Charles Kinoti
Defendant
Kariba Kithinji
Defendant
Mutembei Kanampiu
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Environment Case / 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 proper notice to show cause had been issued to the parties as required by Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendants appeared in court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed. The absence of any action or explanation from the parties led the court to conclude that there was no justification for the continued pendency of the suit. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution, as the requirements of the procedural rule had been satisfied and no cause had been shown to the contrary.
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 HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT CHUKA
ELC CASE NO. 45 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC 172 OF 2014
HARRIET MUTHOMI MUGAMBI…………………….……….PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
GEOFFREY MUGAMBI………………………....……….1ST DEFENDANT
NYAGA M. KARUGUTIRA………………………………2ND DEFENDANT
CHARLES KINOTI………………………………………3RD DEFENDANT
KARIBA KITHINJI……………………………..…………4TH DEFENDANT
MUTEMBEI KANAMPIU…………………...…………….5TH DEFENDANT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 15. 2.2017 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 dismissed for 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 February, 2017 in the absence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Plaintiff – absent
Defendants – absent
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE