[2020] KEELC 2633 (KLR)
The court found that the suit was active between March and September 2018, with the Plaintiff taking steps to fix hearing dates. The dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution on 16th November 2018 occurred before the lapse of one year without action, contrary to Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 2633 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Michael Mutua Mutuku t/a Sunrise Secondary School; Defendant: Philip Makanga c/o Victory Faith Ministries; Defendant: Thomas Nyambuto Omwenge
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 56 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
- Outcome
- Application allowed; suit reinstated.
- Judges
- OA Angote
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Suit, Order 17 Rule 2 Civil Procedure Rules, Service of Notice, Court Procedure
- 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
Michael Mutua Mutuku t/a Sunrise Secondary School
Plaintiff
Philip Makanga c/o Victory Faith Ministries
Defendant
Thomas Nyambuto Omwenge
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution was premature under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiff and his advocate were properly served with notice to show cause before dismissal.
- 3 Whether the suit should be reinstated and set down for hearing on its merits.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the suit was active between March and September 2018, with the Plaintiff taking steps to fix hearing dates. The dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution on 16th November 2018 occurred before the lapse of one year without action, contrary to Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Furthermore, there was no evidence that the Plaintiff's advocate was served with a notice to show cause prior to dismissal. The court held that the dismissal was premature and improper, and therefore allowed the application to set aside the dismissal and reinstated the suit for hearing on its merits.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; suit reinstated.
Orders
- The ex-parte orders of 16th November, 2018 are set aside.
- The suit is reinstated and to be fixed for hearing in the registry on a priority basis.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MACHAKOS
ELC. CASE NO. 56 OF 2012
MICHAEL MUTUA MUTUKUt/a
SUNRISE SECONDARY SCHOOL..............................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
PHILIP MAKANGA C/O
VICTORY FAITH MINISTRIES.........................................1ST DEFENDANT
THOMAS NYAMBUTO OMWENGE................................2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
1. In the Notice of Motion dated 25th February, 2019, the Plaintiff is seeking for the following orders:
a.That this Honourable Court do set aside and/or vary its ex-parte orders of 16th November, 2018.
b.That the suit herein be reinstated and heard on its merit.
c.That costs of this Application be in the cause.
2. The Application is supported by the Affidavit of the Plaintiff who has deponed that this suit was last in court on 6th December, 2016 when the same came up for hearing; that on that day, the 1st Defendant sought for more time to file his documents and witness statements and that the matter was then fixed for hearing on 22nd March, 2018.
3. The Plaintiff deponed that on 22nd March, 2018, the court was on vacation and that his advocate tried to fix the matter for hearing but his efforts to locate the file was not successful. The Plaintiff deponed that his advocates on record were never served with the Notice to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed on 16th November 2018.
4. The Application was not opposed.
5. The record shows that on 22nd March, 2018, the matter came up for hearing but the court was not sitting. The Plaintiff’s advocate then fixed the matter for hearing on 5th July, 2018. The record does not show what transpired on that day. However, on 24th August, 2018, this matter was mentioned before the Deputy Registrar who then fixed it for mention on 26th September, 2018.
6. When the matter came up for mention on 26th September, 2018, neither the Plaintiff’s nor the Defendants’ advocate were in court record. Indeed, it is not clear if the mention notice was ever served on the Plaintiff’s advocate considering that the Deputy Registrar fixed the mention notice of 26th September, 2018 on her own motion.
7. When none of the parties appeared before the Deputy Registrar on 26th September, 2018, she directed that the matter should be listed for dismissal on 16th November, 2018, which is the date that the suit was dismissed for want of prosecution.
8. Considering that the matter was active in court between 22nd March, 2018 and 26th September, 2018, the dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution on 16th November, 2018, before the lapse of one (1) year, was contrary to the provisions of Order 17 Rule (2) (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules which states as follows:
“2. (1) In any suit in which no application has been made or step taken by either party for one year, the court may give notice in writing to the parties to show cause why the suit dismissed, and if cause is not shown to its satisfaction, may dismiss the suit.”
9. The Plaintiff having fixed the suit for hearing on 22nd March, 2018, and the suit having not been listed for hearing because the court was not sitting, it was improper for the court to dismiss the suit on its own motion on 16th November, 2018 for want of prosecution. The said dismissal was premature and contrary to the provisions of Order 17 Rule 2 (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
10. For those reasons, the Application dated 25th February, 2019 is allowed as prayed. The suit to be fixed for hearing in the registry on priority basis.
DATED, DELIVERED AND SIGNED IN MACHAKOS THIS 15TH DAY OF MAY, 2020.
O.A. ANGOTE
JUDGE