[2017] KEELC 655 (KLR)
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued and that neither party appeared in court to provide reasons against dismissal. In the absence of any cause shown, and in accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court determined that the suit had not been prosecuted and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 655 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Loyford Njagi Mwiandi; Respondent: Chairman Muthambi Division Land Dispute Tribunal; Interested Party: Antony Murithi M’Ithari
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 8 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Judicial Review, 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
Loyford Njagi Mwiandi
Applicant
Chairman Muthambi Division Land Dispute Tribunal
Respondent
Antony Murithi M’Ithari
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the notice to show cause was properly issued and that neither party appeared in court to provide reasons against dismissal. In the absence of any cause shown, and in accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court determined that the suit had not been prosecuted and therefore merited dismissal for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The suit is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION CASE NO. 08 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION CASE NO. 68 OF 2011
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW ORDERS OF CERTIORARI AGAINST MUTHAMBI DIVISION LAND DISPUTE TRIBUNAL
AND
IN THE MATTER OF MUTHAMBI DIVISION LAND DISPUTE TRIBUNAL CASE NO. 22 OF 2010
AND
IN THE MATER OF LAND PARCEL NO. MUTHAMBI/GATUA/463
LOYFORD NJAGI MWIANDI……...................………….….EX-PARTE APPLICANT
VERSUS
CHAIRMAN MUTHAMBI DIVISION LAND DISPUTE TRIBUNAL.….RESPONDENT
ANTONY MURITHI M’ITHARI………......................……........INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 20. 12. 2017 to show cause why this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17 rule 2(1) 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 suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17rule 2 (1) 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 20th day of December, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties not in court
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE