[2025] KEELC 4012 (KLR)
The court held that the plaintiff/applicant had provided sufficient reasons for withdrawal of the suit, and there was no opposition from the defendants. The right to withdraw a suit is recognized in law, and the court retains discretion to allow such withdrawal where justified. In this case, the notice of withdrawal...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELC 4012 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Timon Kiplagat Rono (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Simeon Kiprono Kurgat - Deceased); Defendant: Priscah Jerotich Rono; Defendant: Elizabeth Jemutai Rono; Defendant: Ruth Jepkemboi Rono; Defendant: Susan Jepkorir; Defendant: Janet Jebet; Defendant: Christine Jeptoo Rono; Defendant: Philip Kipchumba Maiyo; Defendant: Land Registrar, Nandi County
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E002 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Notice of Withdrawal
- Outcome
- suit withdrawn
- Judges
- GMA Ongondo
- Legal Topics
- Withdrawal of Suit, Injunctive Relief, 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
Timon Kiplagat Rono (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Simeon Kiprono Kurgat - Deceased)
Plaintiff
Priscah Jerotich Rono
Defendant
Elizabeth Jemutai Rono
Defendant
Ruth Jepkemboi Rono
Defendant
Susan Jepkorir
Defendant
Janet Jebet
Defendant
Christine Jeptoo Rono
Defendant
Philip Kipchumba Maiyo
Defendant
Land Registrar, Nandi County
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Notice of Withdrawal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff/applicant is entitled to withdraw the suit in its entirety without opposition from the defendants.
- 2 Whether the court should allow the withdrawal with no orders as to costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the plaintiff/applicant had provided sufficient reasons for withdrawal of the suit, and there was no opposition from the defendants. The right to withdraw a suit is recognized in law, and the court retains discretion to allow such withdrawal where justified. In this case, the notice of withdrawal was found to be meritorious and properly before the court. Accordingly, the suit was marked as withdrawn in its entirety with no orders as to costs.
Court Disposition
suit withdrawn
Orders
- The notice of withdrawal dated 24th March 2025 is allowed.
- The instant suit in entirety is marked as withdrawn with no orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
41 paragraphs
Rono (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Simeon Kiprono Kurgat - Deceased) v Rono & 7 others (Environment & Land Case E002 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 4012 (KLR) (26 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 4012 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet
Environment & Land Case E002 of 2025
GMA Ongondo, J
May 26, 2025
Between
Timon Kiplagat Rono
Plaintiff
Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Simeon Kiprono Kurgat - Deceased
and
Priscah Jerotich Rono
1st Defendant
Elizabeth Jemutai Rono
2nd Defendant
Ruth Jepkemboi Rono
3rd Defendant
Susan Jepkorir
4th Defendant
Janet Jebet
5th Defendant
Christine Jeptoo Rono
6th Defendant
Philip Kipchumba Maiyo
7th Defendant
Land Registrar, Nandi County
8th Defendant
Ruling
1. This ruling pertains to the plaintiff’s Notice of Withdrawal dated 7th March 2025 as regards the pending Notice of Motion dated 28th February 2025 (The application) and the Plaint of even date in entirety with no orders as to costs.
2. In the present matter, the plaintiff/applicant is seeking, inter alia, injunctive relief against the defendants/respondents over the suit parcels of land reference numbers Nandi/Ndalat Settlement/122, 124 and 125.
3. Ms. Christabel M. Otuma instructed by Momanyi Gichana and Company Advocates learned counsel for the plaintiff/applicant implored the court to allow the notice of withdrawal. That there has been no response to the application and the suit. That the plaintiff/applicant intends to pursue Kapsabet ELCLC No. E004 of 2025.
4. Mr. Muhatia Pala learned counsel for the 5th defendant/respondent referred to the Notice of Appointment of Advocate dated 24th March 2025 herein by the 1st defendant/respondent. However, he has no opposition to the withdrawal of this matter as the 1st defendant/respondent intends to file papers in Kapsabet ELCLC No. E004 of 2025.
5. So, is the notice of withdrawal meritorious?
6. The notice of withdrawal was lodged on 7th March 2025 while the notice of appointment was filed on 24th March 2025.
7. It is trite law that the choice by a party to withdraw a matter before court having given reasons thereof as a general rule, cannot be taken away from that party; see Council of Governors-vs-Senate & another; SC Reference No. 1 of 2014 (2014) eKLR.
8. Learned counsel for the plaintiff/applicant has provided sufficient reasons for withdrawal of this suit in entirety.
9. Notably, the withdrawal sought by the applicant herein is within the discretion of this court; see M & E Consulting Engineers Limited-vs-Lake Basin Development Authority and another (2015) eKLR.
10. In the premises, I find the notice of withdrawal of the suit is firm and merited.
11. Wherefore, the notice of withdrawal dated 24th March 2025, be and is hereby allowed hence, the instant suit in entirety is marked as withdrawn with no orders as to costs.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT KAPSABET THIS 26TH DAY OF MAY 2025. G. M. A ONGONDOJUDGEPresent;1. Ms. C M Otuma instructed by Momanyi Gichana, Learned Counsel for the plaintiff/applicant2. Mr. Muhatia Pala, Learned Counsel for the 5th defendant/respondent3. Mr. Walter Kipkorir, Court Assistant