[2023] KEHC 24026 (KLR)
The court found that despite the matter being filed in 2020 and several mentions with notices served, neither party appeared nor took steps to prosecute the suit. The plaintiff failed to advance the case, and both parties were absent on the date set for mention despite being served. The court exercised its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 24026 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: JMS; Defendant: KKO
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 8 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Matrimonial Property, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- 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
JMS
Plaintiff
KKO
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.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that despite the matter being filed in 2020 and several mentions with notices served, neither party appeared nor took steps to prosecute the suit. The plaintiff failed to advance the case, and both parties were absent on the date set for mention despite being served. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution, noting the lack of diligence and interest in pursuing the matter.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
JMS v KKO (Civil Suit 8 of 2020) [2023] KEHC 24026 (KLR) (24 October 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 24026 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Civil Suit 8 of 2020
RE Aburili, J
October 24, 2023
IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 17(1) OF THE MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY ACT 2013
Between
JMS
Plaintiff
and
KKO
Defendant
Ruling
1. It is now 13. 48 hours, parties are called out but they are absent.
2. This suit was filed in 2020 and despite the court moving itself to mention the matter and serving of notices to the parties, there is no appearance on the many occasions that the matter has previously been mentioned.
3. The Plaintiff has also not taken any steps to have the suit prosecuted.
4. Accordingly, as the parties were served on 29th September 2023 and there is no appearance, this suit is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with no orders as to costs and the file is closed.
5. I so order.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 24THDAY OF OCTOBER, 2023R. E. ABURILIJUDGE