Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Environment & Land Judicial 22B of 2011 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | Cyprian Kithinji Muchai v Republic, Imenti South District Ldt & Senior Principal Magistrate Nkubu Law Courts |
| Date Delivered: | 16 May 2018 |
| Case Class: | Civil |
| Court: | Environment and Land Court at Meru |
| Case Action: | Ruling |
| Judge(s): | Lucy Mwihaki Njuguna |
| Citation: | Cyprian Kithinji Muchai v Republic & 2 others [2018] eKLR |
| Advocates: | Mwiti holding brief for Thangicia for Exparte applicant, Mutuma for Interested party present |
| Court Division: | Land and Environment |
| County: | Meru |
| Advocates: | Mwiti holding brief for Thangicia for Exparte applicant, Mutuma for Interested party present |
| History Advocates: | One party or some parties represented |
| Case Outcome: | Application allowed |
| Disclaimer: | The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
ELC JR 22B OF 2011
CYPRIAN KITHINJI MUCHAI..........................EXPARTE APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC......................................................................1ST RESPONDENT
IMENTI SOUTH DISTRICT LDT..............................2ND RESPONDENT
SENIOR PRINCIPAL MAGISTRATE
NKUBU LAW COURTS...............................................3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1. In the application of 24.7.2017, applicant seeks orders of reinstatement of the suit, which suit was withdrawn on 12.6.2017.
2. Exparte applicant avers that the advocate had no instructions to withdraw the case.
3. On 30.1.2018, Mr. Mutuma advocate for the interested party had informed the court that they would be opposing the application of 24.7.2017 and requested for 14 days to file a response which prayer was allowed.
4. The matter was to be canvassed by way of filing written submissions. The interested party did not file any replying affidavit or submissions.
5. For the Attorney General, there was indication that they would not oppose the application.
6. The application is hence unopposed. I allow the same. However, considering that this matter is very old and that exparte applicant had not moved the matter for prosecution from 23.7.2013 and that it is the court on its own motion which had listed the matter for hearing on 12.6.2017, then I direct that the case be listed down for hearing within the next 90 days.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS DAY OF 16th MAY, 2018 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
Court Assistant: Janet/Galgalo
Mwiti holding brief for Thangicia for exparte applicant present
Attorney General for respondent absent
Mutuma for Interested party present
HON. LUCY. N. MBUGUA
ELC JUDGE
Please Wait. Searching ...