REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI COMMERCIAL &ADMIRALTY DIVISION CIVIL CASE NO. 133 OF 2007 NAIVASHA SELF SERVICE STORE LIMITED::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::PLAINTIFF VERSUS CAPITAL MOTORS EXHIBITION LIMITED:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::DEFENDANT RULING 1. The Notice to Show Cause before the court is dated 16th September 2014. When it came for hearing on 31st October 2014, the Plaintiff or its representatives did not appear in court. The Defendant was represented by its counsel M/s Ngoima who supported the Notice to Show Cause and prayed for the dismissal of the suit with costs. 2. I have also noted that the same Notice to Show Cause came up for hearing on 24th October 2014. On that day, Mr. Kiche held brief for Mr. Abidha for the Plaintiff while Mr. Kaburu appeared for the Defendant. Mr. Kiche was not ready to proceed and successfully applied for adjournment to enable the Plaintiff to file a response to the said Notice to Show Cause. That is why the matter was adjourned to 31st October 2014, on which day Mr. Kiche for the Plaintiff never turned up. 3. I am satisfied that the Plaintiff’s suit has been promptly not prosecuted and that the Plaintiff appears to have lost interest on the same. 4. Pursuant to the foregoing, I now herewith dismiss the suit within for want of prosecution pursuant to the Notice to Show Causes dated 16th September 2014. The costs of the suit shall be for the Defendant. Orders accordingly. READ, DELIVERED AND DATED AT NAIROBI THIS 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014 E. K. O. OGOLA JUDGE PRESENT: No appearance for the Plaintiff Kaburu for the Defendant Teresia – Court Clerk
Original judgment
Naivasha Self Service Store Limited::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::plaintiff v Capital Motors Exhibition Limited:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::defendant
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.