[2020] KEELC 3524 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's reasons for non-attendance were unacceptable, especially given that a final adjournment had been granted in the applicant's presence. The plaintiff had died in 2016 and was never substituted, and the matter was already old, having been filed in 2006. The duty to progress the case...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 3524 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Johnstone Hunter Ambale; Respondent: Veronica Lunani Matekwa
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 328 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- NA Matheka
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Suit, Non Attendance, Substitution of Deceased Party
- 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
Johnstone Hunter Ambale
Applicant
Veronica Lunani Matekwa
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the orders dismissing the suit for want of prosecution should be set aside and the suit reinstated.
- 2 Whether the reasons for non-attendance by the applicant's counsel are sufficient to warrant reinstatement of the suit.
- 3 Whether justice will be served by reinstating an old suit where the plaintiff is deceased and not substituted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's reasons for non-attendance were unacceptable, especially given that a final adjournment had been granted in the applicant's presence. The plaintiff had died in 2016 and was never substituted, and the matter was already old, having been filed in 2006. The duty to progress the case lies with the plaintiff, and the delay was both prolonged and inexcusable. The interests of justice for both parties required that the application be dismissed. Consequently, the application to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the suit was found to have no merit and was dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the suit is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT KAKAMEGA
ELC CASE NO. 328 OF 2017
JOHNSTONE HUNTER AMBALE................................................PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
VERSUS
VERONICA LUNANI MATEKWA..........................................DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
RULING
This application is dated 16th November 2019 and is brought under section 3 & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and order 12 rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 seeking the following orders;
1. That the orders for closure and/or dismissal of the above suit for want of prosecution on the 4th November, 2019 be set aside and the suit be reinstated for full hearing and determination.
2. That the costs of this application be in the cause.
It is based on the annexed affidavit of Timothy Omwando Mbaka Advocate and on the following grounds that applicant’s counsel has been attending the court consistently without delay. That the matter herein is extremely emotive in that it involves the issue of land and in which the plaintiff had testified way back in March, 2010 before he passed on 15th June, 2016. That on the material day the family members of the deceased plaintiff were present in court but they were not given a chance to be heard. That on the material day the counsel for the plaintiff Mr. Mbaka was held up before the Kakamega High Court No. 1 in Succession Cause No. 814 of 2009. That when the said counsel rushed to the court at around 9. 15 a.m. the court was already through with its call over. That the busy schedule of a counsel should not be visited upon an innocent litigant. That the plaintiff has a good case with high chances of success.
This court has considered the application and the submissions therein. The applicant’s counsel submitted that he was held up before the Kakamega High Court No. 1 in Succession Cause No. 814 of 2009 on the material day and could not attend court on time. I have perused the court file and find that this suit was dismissed on 4th November 2019 after being given the final adjournment on 16th July 2019. The applicant was in court when the date was given in his presence and he was given the final adjournment. The plaintiff passed on in 2016 and was never substituted. This is an old matter filed way back in 2006. Reasons advanced for the non-attendance are unacceptable.
In the case of Utalii Transport Company Ltd & 3 Others vs NIC Bank & Another (2014) eKLR, the court held that it is the primary duty of the plaintiffs to take steps to progress their case since they are the ones who dragged the defendant to court. The decision on whether the suit should be reinstated for trial is a matter of justice and it depends on the facts of the case. In Ivita v Kyumbu (1984) KLR 441, Chesoni J as he then was, stated that the test is whether the delay is prolonged and inexcusable and if justice will be done despite the delay. Justice is justice for both the plaintiff and the defendant. I find this application has no merit and I dismiss it with costs.
It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA IN OPEN COURT THIS 19TH FEBRUARY 2020.
N.A. MATHEKA
JUDGE