Automated Summary
Key Facts
The court dismissed the case of Girishon Githungo Hitha v Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd. for want of prosecution. The last activity on the suit occurred on 2011-06-02 when the plaintiff sought interim injunctive orders against the defendant, which were not granted. The dismissal followed a Notice to Show Cause dated 2014-09-29, with the judgment delivered on 2014-11-18 and costs awarded to the defendant.
Issues
The court considered whether to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution due to no activity since 2011 when the plaintiff sought interim injunctive orders, which were not granted. The defendant's application for dismissal was supported, and the court ruled in favor of dismissal under the Notice to Show Cause dated 2014.
Holdings
The court dismissed the suit filed by Girishon Githungo Hitha against Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd. on 18th November 2014, citing lack of prosecution. The last activity in the case occurred on 2nd June 2011 when the plaintiff sought interim injunctive orders, which were not granted. The defendant's Notice of Motion, filed on 17th October 2014, supported the dismissal, and the court ruled in favor of the defendant with costs.
Remedies
- The court dismissed the suit pursuant to the Notice to Show Cause dated 1st October 2014, finding no prosecution activity since 2nd June 2011. The dismissal included an order for costs to the Defendant.
- The court ordered that the costs associated with the dismissal be borne by the Defendant, Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd., as part of the ruling on 18th November 2014.
Judge Name
E. K. O. Ogola
Passage Text
- 4. I am satisfied that the suit herein should be dismissed pursuant to the said Notice to Show Cause dated 1st October 2014, and so hold, with costs to the Defendant.
- 3. The court has also observed that the last activity on the suit was on 2nd June 2011 when the Plaintiff sought interim injunctive orders against the Defendant, but which were not granted.
- 1. Before the court is a Notice to Show Cause dated 29th September 2014, which was served upon both the Defendant and the Plaintiff. There is no appearance for the Plaintiff while for the Defendant Mr. Litoro appeared and supported the dismissal of the suit pursuant to the said Notice to show Cause.