Republic v Chairman of the Arbitration Board, Tharaka Adjudication Area, Gatunga Adjudication Section, Land Adjudication Officer, Tharaka Adjudication Area, Gatunga Adjudication Section & Tharaka County Council Ex-Parte Mbugi Kirakura [2017] KEELC 3398 (KLR) | Dismissal For Want Of Prosecution | Esheria

Republic v Chairman of the Arbitration Board, Tharaka Adjudication Area, Gatunga Adjudication Section, Land Adjudication Officer, Tharaka Adjudication Area, Gatunga Adjudication Section & Tharaka County Council Ex-Parte Mbugi Kirakura [2017] KEELC 3398 (KLR)

Full Case Text

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA

CHUKA MISCELLANEOUS JR  CASE NO 04 OF 2017

FORMERLY MERU MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.40 OF 2010

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY MBUGI KIRAKURA FOR ORDERS OF CERTIORARI AND PROHIBITION

AND

IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 8 & 9 OF THE LAW REFORM ACT CAP 26 LAWS OF KENYA

AND

IN THE MATTER OF LAND COMMITTEE CASE NO. 94/05, 92/05, 232/05, 22/05, 209/05, 228/05

AND

IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BOARD CASES NUMBER 157/08, 158/08, 159/08, 161/08, 166/08

AND

IN THE MATTER OF PARCEL NO.216 – THARAKA ADJUDICATION AREA, GATUNGA ADJUDICATION SECTION

AND

REPUBLIC…………………….......................................................................................……………APPLICANT

VERSUS

THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ARBITRATION BOARD, THARAKA ADJUDICATION AREA, GATUNGA ADJUDICATION SECTIO…......1ST RESPONDENT

THE LAND ADJUDICATION OFFICER, THARAKA ADJUDICATION AREA, GATUNGA ADJUDICATION SECTION ………………..2ND RESPONDENT

THARAKA COUNTY COUNCIL ………………......................................................………..INTERESTED PARTY

EX-PARTE……………………….....................................................………..................……..MBUGI KIRAKURA

RULING

1. When the parties were to come to court on 15. 3.2017 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 15th day of  March, 2017 in the presence of:

CA: Ndegwa

Parties absent

P.M. NJOROGE

JUDGE