[2017] KEELC 792 (KLR)
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued to the parties. Neither the plaintiffs nor the defendant appeared in court to provide reasons or show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. In accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 792 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Juliet Cionjoka Mutegi; Plaintiff: Joan Wanja Mutegi; Plaintiff: John Mwenda Mutegi; Plaintiff: Peter Njagi Mutegi; Defendant: Hilda Karimi Njeru
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 168 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 17 Rule 2, Failure to Prosecute, Land Dispute
- 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
Juliet Cionjoka Mutegi
Plaintiff
Joan Wanja Mutegi
Plaintiff
John Mwenda Mutegi
Plaintiff
Peter Njagi Mutegi
Plaintiff
Hilda Karimi Njeru
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / 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(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued to the parties. Neither the plaintiffs nor the defendant appeared in court to provide reasons or show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. In accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court determined that the failure of the parties to attend and prosecute the matter justified the dismissal of the suit. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit due to inaction and lack of prosecution by the parties.
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
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO. 168 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC. 54 OF 2012
JULIET CIONJOKA MUTEGI...........................................1ST PLAINTIFF
JOAN WANJA MUTEGI..................................................2ND PLAINTIFF
JOHN MWENDA MUTEGI..............................................3RD PLAINTIFF
PETER NJAGI MUTEGI....................................................4TH PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
HILDA KARIMI NJERU..........................................................DEFENDANT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 23. 11. 2017 to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17 rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, they did not turn up.
2. I am satisfied that the apposite notice was properly issued.
3. I find that the parties have failed to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17 rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The suit, therefore, merits dismissal.
4. The suit is dismissed.
5. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 23rd day of November, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties absent
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE