Ogeto v NCBA Bank Kenya PLC & another (Civil Appeal E027 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 13257 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Ruling)

Ogeto v NCBA Bank Kenya PLC & another (Civil Appeal E027 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 13257 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Ruling)

The appeal had remained inactive for more than one year, but the record did not show that directions had been given under Order 42 Rule 13 or that the Registrar had listed the matter for dismissal under Order 42 Rule 35(2). Because the prescribed dismissal procedure had not been completed, the court declined to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEHC 13257 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: NATHAN OMBAYE OGETO; 1st Respondent: NCBA BANK KENYA PLC; 2nd Respondent: PAWABA AUCTIONEERS
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E027 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Application partly allowed in the sense that dismissal was declined and a Notice to Show Cause was ordered.
Judges
["TW Cherere"]
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 42 Rule 35 Civil Procedure Rules, Notice to Show Cause, Inactivity in Appeal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appellate Practice Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Order 42 Rule 35 Civil Procedure Rules Notice to Show Cause Inactivity in Appeal

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NATHAN OMBAYE OGETO

Appellant

NCBA BANK KENYA PLC

1st Respondent

PAWABA AUCTIONEERS

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the appeal is liable to dismissal for want of prosecution
  2. 2 Whether the procedural requirements of Order 42 Rule 35 had been satisfied
  3. 3 Whether the court should instead issue a Notice to Show Cause

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal had remained inactive for more than one year, but the record did not show that directions had been given under Order 42 Rule 13 or that the Registrar had listed the matter for dismissal under Order 42 Rule 35(2). Because the prescribed dismissal procedure had not been completed, the court declined to dismiss the appeal and instead directed issuance of a Notice to Show Cause to the Appellant.

Court Disposition

Application partly allowed in the sense that dismissal was declined and a Notice to Show Cause was ordered.

Orders

  • The Deputy Registrar shall issue a Notice to Show Cause to the Appellant requiring him to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  • The Notice to Show Cause shall be served upon the Appellant for hearing on 26th October 2026.