[2017] KEELC 3115 (KLR)
The court found that the parties were properly notified to attend court and show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. As none of the parties appeared or provided any reasons, the court was satisfied that the requirements of Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules had been met....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 3115 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: M’Mbwiria M’Njau; Defendant: Ediel Kirimi M’Bwani; Defendant: K. Rep Bank Ltd; Defendant: Joseph Gikonyo T/A; Defendant: Garam Investment
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 33 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 Civil Procedure Rules
- 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’Mbwiria M’Njau
Plaintiff
Ediel Kirimi M’Bwani
Defendant
K. Rep Bank Ltd
Defendant
Joseph Gikonyo T/A
Defendant
Garam Investment
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 parties were properly notified to attend court and show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. As none of the parties appeared or provided any reasons, the court was satisfied that the requirements of Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules had been met. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution, as there was no justification provided by any party to keep the matter alive.
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 33 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC CASE NO.171 OF 2011
M’MBWIRIA M’NJAU…..…..................…….....PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
EDIEL KIRIMI M’BWANI……..................1ST DEFENDANT
K. REP BANK LTD………...................…2ND DEFENDANT
JOSEPH GIKONYO T/A……..................3RD DEFENDANT
GARAM INVESTMENT…...................….4TH DEFENDANT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 06. 04. 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 6th day of April, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties absent
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE