[2017] KEELC 2093 (KLR)
The court found that the appellants failed to attend court or provide any justification for the delay in prosecuting the appeal, despite being properly notified. The respondents present demonstrated to the court's satisfaction that the appeal had not been prosecuted diligently. Consequently, the court exercised its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 2093 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Nkoroi Rimukia Kirimo; Appellant: Eustace Kangangi Kirimo; Appellant: Andiel Irambu Kirimo; Respondent: Anderson Mwiathi; Respondent: Peter Mutwiri
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 79 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Appeals Process, Civil Procedure Rules, 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
Nkoroi Rimukia Kirimo
Appellant
Eustace Kangangi Kirimo
Appellant
Andiel Irambu Kirimo
Appellant
Anderson Mwiathi
Respondent
Peter Mutwiri
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution under Orders 17 and 42 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellants failed to attend court or provide any justification for the delay in prosecuting the appeal, despite being properly notified. The respondents present demonstrated to the court's satisfaction that the appeal had not been prosecuted diligently. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion under Orders 17 and 42 of the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC [CA] CASE NO 79 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC [CA] CASE NO. 57 OF 2013
NKOROI RIMUKIA KIRIMO………...………………1ST APPELLANT
EUSTACE KANGANGI KIRIMO……………………2ND APPELLANT
ANDIEL IRAMBU KIRIMO………………………….3RD APPELLANT
VERSUS
ANDERSON MWAITHI & 6 OTHERS………….…RESPONDENTS
RULING
1. Parties were to come to court to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of both orders 17 and 42, Civil Procedure Rules.
2. Proper notices were issued. More particularly notice was issued informing the parties that this appeal was being listed for dismissal before me on 25. 7.2017.
3. On 25. 7.2017, only two respondents, Anderson Mwiathi and Peter Mutwiri turned up. The other parties were absent. They urged the court to dismiss this appeal.
4. I find that this appeal merits dismissal. The two respondents present in court have shown to the satisfaction of the court that this appeal should be dismissed. The appellants have not shown to the satisfaction of the court that this appeal should not be dismissed.
5. In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed.
6. I issue no order as to costs.
7. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 25th day of July, 2017
in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Anderson Mwiathi & Peter Mutwiri - respondents
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE