[2017] KEELC 2120 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had previously been granted an adjournment to avail their witnesses but failed to provide adequate reasons or evidence of efforts made to secure their attendance for the current hearing. Given the protracted nature of the case, which has been pending for 24 years, and the advanced...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 2120 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: M'RINGERA M'MBWIRIA; Defendant: SARAH KAIMURI M'ITONGA
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 616 of 1993
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Adjournment
- Outcome
- Application for adjournment declined.
- Judges
- LN Mbugua
- Legal Topics
- Adjournment of Hearing, Delay of Proceedings, Case Management
- 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'RINGERA M'MBWIRIA
Plaintiff
SARAH KAIMURI M'ITONGA
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Adjournment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff has provided sufficient reasons for the adjournment of the hearing.
- 2 Whether continued adjournments amount to injustice due to delay.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had previously been granted an adjournment to avail their witnesses but failed to provide adequate reasons or evidence of efforts made to secure their attendance for the current hearing. Given the protracted nature of the case, which has been pending for 24 years, and the advanced age of the defendant, the court determined that further adjournment would be unjust and contrary to the constitutional imperative for expeditious justice. The application for adjournment was therefore declined to prevent further delay and prejudice to the parties, particularly the defendant.
Court Disposition
Application for adjournment declined.
Orders
- The application for adjournment is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
CIVIL SUIT NO 616 OF 1993
M'RINGERA M'MBWIRIA.................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SARAH KAIMURI M'ITONGA.....................................DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
This Ruling is in respect of the application for adjournment made by Plaintiff's Counsel on the basis that they don't have their witnesses.
I find that on 09. 05. 17, the case was adjourned at the instance of the Plaintiff for Plaintiff to avail the makers of MF1 2 and 3.
Today the Court has been informed that the maker of MF1 2 cant be traced. No reasons have been advanced as to why the other witness (maker of MF1 3) is not in Court.
The Court has not been told as to what efforts have been made to trace the witness.
This is a 1993 case which means that it has been in the Court corridors for close to 24 years. The litigants have aged and a case in point is the defendant who is a very old woman.
Justice delayed is also justice denied. See article 159 2(b) of the Constitution and Section 1 A and 1 B of the Civil Procedure Act.
I decline to grant any adjournment in the matter.
DELIVERED DATED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 26TH JULY, 2017
IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
CA: Janet
Murango Mwenda for Defendant
Mwirigi h/b for Mr. Kariuki for Plaintiff
HON. L.N. MBUGUA
JUDGE