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

MOSES MUCHUNU MUTURI v ATTORNEY GENERAL & 2 OTHERS [2007] KEHC 562 (KLR)

[2007] KEHC 562 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
562
Citation
[2007] KEHC 562 (KLR)
Decided
6 July 2007
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureApplication to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution and to strike off the suit for abuse of process.CoramMARY KASANGO
Holding

The suit is hereby dismissed as against the 3rd Defendant for want of prosecution with costs of the suit being awarded to the 3rd Defendant.

Facts

The suit was last in court on 29th June 2004, and the Plaintiff has not taken any steps towards prosecuting the matter since then. The subject land was first registered in the name of Kariira Njogu before it was registered in the Plaintiff's name in 1984.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
  2. Whether the suit should be struck off for abuse of process.
  3. Whether the prohibitory order should be lifted.

Reasoning

The court found that the Plaintiff has lost interest in the matter and there is no good reason to allow the suit to continue. The Plaintiff has not taken any steps towards prosecuting the matter since 29th June 2004.

Outcome

Dismissed

Orders

  • The suit is hereby dismissed as against the 3rd Defendant for want of prosecution with costs of the suit being awarded to the 3rd Defendant.
  • The prohibitory order registered against the title No. INOI/NDIMI/123 on 21st July 1995 is hereby discharged.
  • The 3rd Defendant is also awarded costs of the Notice of Motion date 18th October 2005.

Remedies

  • Costs awarded to the 3rd Defendant.
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case