Mutua v M’Ruthiri

Mutua v M’Ruthiri (t/a Oasis of Living God Ministry) (Land Case E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 18696 (KLR) (25 March 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 18696 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA LAND CASE E006 OF 2024 BM EBOSO, J MARCH 25, 2025 BETWEEN PETER MBABU MUTUA .......................................................................... PLAINTIFF AND DANIEL MWENDA M’RUTHIRI ....................................................... DEFENDANT T/A OASIS OF LIVING GOD MINISTRY RULING 1. Through an oral application, the plainti has exercised his right to withdraw this suit. The oral plea is not opposed. However, the defendant insists on being awarded costs of the withdrawn suit. 2. On the question of whether to award or not award costs, the general principle is contained in Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act. That principle is that costs follow the event. Secondly, for the court to depart from the general principle, the party inviting the court to depart has an obligation to demonstrate circumstances that justify a departure. 3. In the present oral plea, no justiable circumstances have been demonstrated to warrant to a departure. Unavailability of witnesses to advance the plainti’s case cannot be descripted as special circumstances that warrant a departure. What the court is being told is that the plainti does not have evidence. The defendant cannot be denied costs because of the plainti’s inability to avail evidence. 4. For the above reason, the plainti will bear costs of the withdrawn case. The case is marked withdrawn. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT CHUKA THIS 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025. B M EBOSO [MR] https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/18696/eng@2025-03-25 1

page 1 of 2