[2018] KEELC 4865 (KLR)
The court found that the parties failed to attend court and did not show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The notice to show cause was properly issued in accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. As no sufficient cause was shown, the court exercised its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 4865 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Zipporah Muthoni Miriti; Defendant: Bernard Miriti Muraga & Another
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 247 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property / Ruling on Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 17 Rule 2, Case Management, 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
Zipporah Muthoni Miriti
Plaintiff
Bernard Miriti Muraga & Another
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property / 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 parties failed to attend court and did not show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The notice to show cause was properly issued in accordance with Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. As no sufficient cause was shown, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit 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
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO. 247 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU ELC. 189 OF 2013
ZIPPORAH MUTHONI MIRITI………………..……………..…….PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
BERNARD MIRITI MURAGA & ANOTHER………………….. DEFENDANT
RULING
1. When the parties were to come to court on 16. 1.2018 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 17 rule 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 16th day of January, 2018 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties not in court
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE