[2017] KEELC 2180 (KLR)
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued and that neither party attended court to provide reasons against dismissal. In the absence of any explanation or action from the parties, the court was satisfied that the requirements for dismissal for want of prosecution under Order 42 Rule 35(2) of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 2180 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Rauni M’Iya Kiriga; Respondent: Lena Ciambaka Kibonge
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal 29 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, Appeal Procedure, Order 42 Rule 35
- 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
Rauni M’Iya Kiriga
Appellant
Lena Ciambaka Kibonge
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 notice to show cause was properly issued and that neither party attended court to provide reasons against dismissal. In the absence of any explanation or action from the parties, the court was satisfied that the requirements for dismissal for want of prosecution under Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules were met. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.
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
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC [CA] CASE NO 29 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC [CA] CASE NO. 215 OF 2013
RAUNI M’IYA KIRIGA…………..…....……………………………..APPELLANT
VERSUS
LENA CIAMBAKA KIBONGE…………………..………… ……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