[2020] KEELC 3541 (KLR)
The court found that after the last ruling, the plaintiff took no steps to prosecute the matter and failed to attend court on the date set for mention, despite being served. The reasons advanced for reinstatement were deemed unacceptable. The court emphasized that it is the plaintiff's duty to progress their case...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 3541 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Bulinga Keya; Respondent: Philip Owino; Respondent: Alice Auma
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 500 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 Non Attendance, Reinstatement of Suit, Court Notices, Delay in 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
Joseph Bulinga Keya
Applicant
Philip Owino
Respondent
Alice Auma
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the order dismissing the suit for non-attendance should be set aside and the case reinstated for hearing.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff was denied a fair opportunity to be heard due to lack of notice.
- 3 Whether the delay in prosecuting the suit was excusable.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that after the last ruling, the plaintiff took no steps to prosecute the matter and failed to attend court on the date set for mention, despite being served. The reasons advanced for reinstatement were deemed unacceptable. The court emphasized that it is the plaintiff's duty to progress their case and that justice must be balanced for both parties. The delay was found to be inexcusable, and the application to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the suit 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
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KAKAMEGA
ELC CASE NO. 500 OF 2017
JOSEPH BULINGA KEYA..............................PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
VERSUS
PHILIP OWINO
ALICE AUMA...........................................DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
RULING
This application is dated 24th July 2019 and is brought under Section 5 (1) of the Judicature Act Cap 8 of the Laws of Kenya, Civil Procedure (amendment No. 2) Rule 2012 Part 8 order 51, Civil Procedure Rule and Sections 3A, 1A & B Civil Procedure Act seeking the following orders;
1. That the order of dismissal of this case issued on the 25th June, 2019 for non-attendance be set aside and the case reinstated for full hearing and disposal on merit.
2. Costs be in the cause.
It is based on the grounds that this case was not due for dismissal. That a cursory perusal of court record showed that notice was to be issued to the parties herein to appear before the honourable court for mention for directions on the matter. That no notice was issued to the advocates on record for the plaintiff before the dismissal order was issued which in essence did deny the plaintiff a chance to explain the status of the case and to take directions. It is necessary and in the interest of justice that the case be reinstated for full hearing and disposal. No prejudice will be suffered by the defendants if the prayers sought are granted for they will have a chance to defend the suit and present their case and in any event an award of cost can suffice upon determination of the suit.
The 2nd respondent submitted that vide plaint alongside notice of motion dated 6/12/2017 and filed on the 7/12/2017 the plaintiff sued her claiming the orders outlined therein. That the notice of motion was argued by way of submission and the same was disallowed on 30/5/2018. That the plaintiff slept on his right for approximately 5 months her advocate invited vide their letter dated 26/10/2018 served upon the plaintiff’s counsel on 31/10/2018 attend court on 16/11/2018 to fix a mutual convenient date they failed to attend court (exhibit marked AA1). That the court issued notice pursuant to order 17 rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010.
This court has considered the application and the submissions therein. The applicant’s counsel submitted that notice was issued to the parties herein to appear before the honourable court for mention for directions on the matter. That no notice was issued to the advocates on record for the plaintiff before the dismissal order was issued which in essence did deny the plaintiff a chance to explain the status of the case and to take directions. I have perused the court file and find that this suit was dismissed on 25th June 2019 for non-attendance. After the last ruling of this court on the 30th May 2019 the plaintiff took no steps to prosecute this matter and the court served them to attend court on the 25th June 2019 which they did not. This is an old matter of 2017. Reasons advanced why this application should be granted 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