[2017] KEELC 2192 (KLR)
The court found that the parties, having been duly notified to appear and show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution, failed to attend court or provide any reasons. The court was satisfied that proper notice had been issued in accordance with Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 2192 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Oliver Njeru Francis; Appellant: Susan Nyawira Nyaga; Respondent: James Gitari Francis; Respondent: Mary Kaari Francis
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 18 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, Order 42 Rule 35, 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
Oliver Njeru Francis
Appellant
Susan Nyawira Nyaga
Appellant
James Gitari Francis
Respondent
Mary Kaari Francis
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 Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the parties, having been duly notified to appear and show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution, failed to attend court or provide any reasons. The court was satisfied that proper notice had been issued in accordance with Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. In the absence of any explanation or action by the parties, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, thereby upholding the procedural requirement that litigation must be actively pursued and not allowed to stagnate.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC [CA] CASE NO 18 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC [CA] CASE NO. 71 OF 2013
OLIVER NJERU FRANCIS ..…....…....…………………........ 1ST APPELLANT
SUSAN NYAWIRA NYAGA………………………….........…...2ND APPELLANT
VERSUS
JAMES GITARI FRANCIS………………………….......……1ST RESPONDENT
MARY KAARI FRANCIS…………………………………….2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 13. 7.2017 to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 42 rule 35(2) 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 Appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of Order 42 Rule 35 (2) 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 13th day of July, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties -absent
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE