[2017] KEELC 689 (KLR)
The court found that neither party attended court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution as required by Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Although the plaintiff filed a letter indicating withdrawal of the suit, this did not amount to a satisfactory explanation or...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 689 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: M’Kairanya M’Majuria; Defendant: David Mutegi Kairanya
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 151 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution; no order as to costs
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Withdrawal of Suit
- 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
M’Kairanya M’Majuria
Plaintiff
David Mutegi Kairanya
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.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff's withdrawal of the suit affects the dismissal process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that neither party attended court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution as required by Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Although the plaintiff filed a letter indicating withdrawal of the suit, this did not amount to a satisfactory explanation or compliance with the court's directive to show cause. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution. No order as to costs was made.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution; no order as to costs
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- No costs are awarded.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO 151 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC CASE NO.40 OF 2012
M’KAIRANYA M’MAJURIA...............................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
DAVID MUTEGI KAIRANYA............................................DEFENDANT
RULING
1. Parties were to come to court on 30. 11. 2017 to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of the provisions of Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
2. They did not attend court. However, a letter dated 29. 11. 2017 was filed in court on 29. 11. 2017 informing the court that the plaintiff had wholly withdrawn the suit against the defendant.
3. I find that the parties did not show cause to the satisfaction of this court that the suit should not be dismissed.
4. In the circumstances, this suit is dismissed.
5. No costs are awarded.
6. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 30th day of November, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties not present
P. M. NJOROGE,
JUDGE.