[2017] KEELC 3398 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 3398 (KLR)

The court found that the notice to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution was properly issued. Neither the applicant nor the respondents 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...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 3398 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Chairman of the Arbitration Board, Tharaka Adjudication Area, Gatunga Adjudication Section; Respondent: Land Adjudication Officer, Tharaka Adjudication Area, Gatunga Adjudication Section; Interested Party: Tharaka County Council; Ex Parte Applicant: Mbugi Kirakura
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application 04 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, Adjudication Process, Judicial Review, Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Adjudication Process Judicial Review Land Disputes

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Chairman of the Arbitration Board, Tharaka Adjudication Area, Gatunga Adjudication Section

Respondent

Land Adjudication Officer, Tharaka Adjudication Area, Gatunga Adjudication Section

Respondent

Tharaka County Council

Interested Party

Mbugi Kirakura

Ex Parte Applicant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 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 why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution was properly issued. Neither the applicant nor the respondents 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 was satisfied that the requirements for dismissal for want of prosecution were met. The suit was therefore dismissed for want of prosecution.

Court Disposition

suit dismissed for want of prosecution

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.