[2017] KEELC 3584 (KLR)
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued and that neither party attended court to provide reasons against dismissal. In the absence of any explanation or action by the parties, the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the suit for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 3584 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Martha Gachea Kathenya; Defendant: John Mati; Defendant: Kithanduru M’Mutungi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 83 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Environment Case / 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, Case Management, Land Disputes
- 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
Martha Gachea Kathenya
Plaintiff
John Mati
Defendant
Kithanduru M’Mutungi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Environment Case / 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 and that neither party attended court to provide reasons against dismissal. In the absence of any explanation or action by the parties, the court exercised its discretion under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution. The failure of the parties to prosecute the matter or respond to the notice justified the dismissal of the suit.
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
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO 83 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC CASE NO.63 OF 2013
MARTHA GACHEA KATHENYA..............................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JOHN MATI...................................................................1ST DEFENDANT
KITHANDURU M’MUTUNGI........................................2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 22. 2.2017 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 22nd day of February, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties absent
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE