[2022] KEELC 1750 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 1750 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant acted promptly by filing the application for reinstatement on the same day the suit was dismissed. The court was satisfied that the respondent had been duly served and had not opposed the application. The court considered the interests of justice and the potential prejudice to the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 1750 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ishmael Kiriungi Mukunya; Respondent: Oscar Kabwana t/a C.D.D. Consortium Group
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 645 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Outcome
Application allowed. Dismissal order set aside and suit reinstated.
Judges
EK Wabwoto
Legal Topics
Reinstatement of Suit, Dismissal for Non Attendance, Setting Aside Orders, Affidavit of Service
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Reinstatement of Suit Dismissal for Non Attendance Setting Aside Orders Affidavit of Service

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ishmael Kiriungi Mukunya

Applicant

Oscar Kabwana t/a C.D.D. Consortium Group

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit

  1. 1 Whether the court should set aside the dismissal order made on 17th November 2021 due to non-attendance by the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the suit should be reinstated for hearing.
  3. 3 Whether the application for reinstatement was properly served and unopposed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant acted promptly by filing the application for reinstatement on the same day the suit was dismissed. The court was satisfied that the respondent had been duly served and had not opposed the application. The court considered the interests of justice and the potential prejudice to the applicant if the suit was not reinstated, particularly given the claim of dispossession of property. Guided by Order 12 Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court exercised its discretion to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the suit, reserving costs to abide the outcome of the main suit.

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Dismissal order set aside and suit reinstated.

Orders

  • The order of dismissal given on 17th November 2021 is hereby set aside and the suit is reinstated.
  • Costs of the application shall be reserved to abide the determination of the main suit.