[1] This is my judgment in respect of the defendant's application to strike out the plaintiff's action for want of prosecution.

[2] Numerous affidavits have been filed to justify each party's argument, and in that process, merits of the case were also canvassed. In an application for want of prosecution, the focus should only be on the issue of delay. The court should not be burdened with irrelevant issues and numerous affidavits, and in this case, nearly eight affidavits have been filed.

[3] I have requested the deputy registrar to prepare a chronology of summary of minutes of court and that chronology is marked as encl 53.

[4] The cases parties have relied on are set out in the annexure to the judgment.

The Brief Facts

[5] The writ was filed on 10 August 2007 and the plaintiff applied for an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendant from dealing with lands charged to the defendant as security for loan to the plaintiff. That application for injunction was dismissed on 13 November 2008. The plaintiff did not seek case management directions immediately to set down the matter for trial or obtained a stay of proceeding for any legitimate reasons. Subsequently, the plaintiff was wo