[2017] KEELC 3044 (KLR)
The court found that neither the applicant nor his advocate provided any reason or showed cause as to why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The respondent's position was upheld, and the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the suit, as...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 3044 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Isaac Nyaga B. Njagi; Respondent: The Chairman Maara District Land Disputes Tribunal; Respondent: The Attorney General; Interested Party: Salesiu Miriti Aphaxard
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 2 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 17 Rule 2, Land Disputes Tribunal, Non Appearance, 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
Isaac Nyaga B. Njagi
Applicant
The Chairman Maara District Land Disputes Tribunal
Respondent
The Attorney General
Respondent
Salesiu Miriti Aphaxard
Interested Party
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 applicant nor his advocate provided any reason or showed cause as to why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The respondent's position was upheld, and the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the suit, as there was no satisfactory explanation for the applicant's absence or failure to prosecute the matter.
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
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA MISC JR CASE NO. 02 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU CIVIL APPLICATION CASE NO. 88 OF 2011
ISAAC NYAGA B. NJAGI…………………………………...APPLICANT
VERSUS
THE CHAIRMAN MAARA DISTRICT
LAND DISPUTES TRIBUNAL…………………..1ST RESPONDENT
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL……………………..2ND RESPONDENT
SALESIU MIRITI APHAXARD………………......INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
1. Parties were to come to court on 15. 3.2017 to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
2. Mr. Mark Muriithi whose firm was on record as representing the applicant told the court that he was not seized of the matter.
3. Mr. Kiongo told the court that as the applicant was not in court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed and his advocate on record had said that he was not seized of the matter, the suit merited dismissal.
4. I find that the parties have not shown to the satisfaction of the court 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
Mark Muriithi for the Applicant
Kiongo for the Respondent
P.M. NJOROGE,
JUDGE