SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Ogona v Maro (Environment and Land Case 57 of 2018) [2025] KEELC 6901 (KLR) (9 October 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEELC 6901 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
6901
Citation
[2025] KEELC 6901 (KLR)
Decided
9 October 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeDeath of Plaintiff in Civil SuitPostureApplication for Abatement of Suit due to Death of PlaintiffCoramYM ANGIMA
Holding

The court finds that the suit should not be abated due to the plaintiff's death, as one year had not lapsed since his death.

Facts

The plaintiff, Maulid Mohamed Ogona, died on 24.04.2025, and his advocate filed a notice of motion seeking the abatement of the suit under Order 24 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules due to the plaintiff's death. The defendant opposed the application, asserting that the suit had not abated as one year had not lapsed since the plaintiff's death and that she had a counter-claim.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit should be abated due to the plaintiff's death
  2. Whether the defendant's counter-claim should be considered

Reasoning

The court ruled that the suit should not be abated because the plaintiff's death did not trigger the abatement of the suit under Order 24 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, as one year had not passed since his death.

Outcome

The application for abatement of the suit was dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for abatement of the suit was dismissed.
  • The costs of the application were not provided for.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case