[2024] KEHC 504 (KLR)
The High Court held that the appeal was filed outside the thirty-day period stipulated under section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, and no leave was sought to file the appeal out of time. The Small Claims Court Act does not provide for a different timeline, so the Civil Procedure Act applies. As a result, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 504 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Al-Rahim Tradin Limited; Respondent: Robinas Oyara Makana; Respondent: Saadi Cars (K) Limited; Respondent: Davejay Kanak t/a Jeds Motors Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal E203 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Preliminary Jurisdictional Objection
- Outcome
- Appeal and application struck out for want of jurisdiction; file closed.
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Out of Time, Stay of Execution, Jurisdiction of High Court
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Al-Rahim Tradin Limited
Appellant
Robinas Oyara Makana
Respondent
Saadi Cars (K) Limited
Respondent
Davejay Kanak t/a Jeds Motors Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Preliminary Jurisdictional Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal filed out of time without leave under section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act.
- 2 Whether the application for stay of execution is competent where the appeal itself is incompetent.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court held that the appeal was filed outside the thirty-day period stipulated under section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act, and no leave was sought to file the appeal out of time. The Small Claims Court Act does not provide for a different timeline, so the Civil Procedure Act applies. As a result, the appeal and the accompanying application for stay of execution were incompetently filed, and the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain them. The court struck out both the memorandum of appeal and the notice of motion, with liberty to the applicant to file an appropriate application afresh.
Court Disposition
Appeal and application struck out for want of jurisdiction; file closed.
Orders
- The Memorandum of Appeal dated 30th November 2023 and Notice of Motion dated 30th November 2023 are struck out as incompetently filed.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
Al-Rahim Tradin Limited v Makana & 2 others (Civil Appeal E203 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 504 (KLR) (30 January 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 504 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Civil Appeal E203 of 2023
RE Aburili, J
January 30, 2024
Between
Al-Rahim Tradin Limited
Appellant
and
Robinas Oyara Makana
1st Respondent
Saadi Cars (K) Limited
2nd Respondent
Davejay Kanak t/a Jeds Motors Limited
3rd Respondent
Ruling
1. This Ruling determines the Appellant’s/Applicant’s application dated 30th November 2023 seeking for stay of execution of decree in Kisumu Small Claims Court Claim No. E222 of 2023, pending hearing and determination of this appeal.
2. The Applicant laments in his grounds of appeal and supporting affidavit that it was never heard before the Small Claims Court.
3. That the appeal has high chances of success as the Motor Vehicle subject of the claim had been sold to a third party who was in its possession as at the time of the accident hence the adjudicator erred in ordering that the Appellant was liable.
4. Although the Applicant’s counsel submitted that he had been served with a Replying affidavit, no such affidavit was filed in court to challenge the application on 30th November 2023.
5. Regrettably, the appeal was filed outside thirty days stipulated under section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act without leave of court.
6. Albeit section 38 of the Small Claims Court Act on appeals does not stipulate the time within which an appeal from the court to this court lies, it is in such cases that parties are called upon to invoke the provisions of section 79G of the Civil Procedure Act. This is the position because the Small Claims Court is a subordinate Court to the High Court and considering the strict timelines that the Act establishing the Court has given including time for review under section 41 of the Act, which is 30 days from the date of the decision, it cannot be the case that the Act gave parties who wished to appeal a blank and open cheque and time to choose when to appeal against the decision of the adjudicator.
7. The record herein shows that Memorandum of Appeal dated 30th November 2023 was filed on 30th November 2023.
8. The impugned judgment was rendered on 25th October 2023 and this appeal was lodged simultaneous with the application for stay of execution pending appeal on 30th November, 2023, which was after 30 days of the impugned judgment without any leave of this court being sought to enlarge time within which the appeal ought to have been filed.
9. In the absence of such leave, this appeal is incompetently filed as this court is devoid of any jurisdiction to hear and determine the merits of an appeal filed out of time.
10. Accordingly, the Memorandum of Appeal dated 30th November 2023 together with the Notice of Motion dated on 30th November 2023, are hereby found to be incompetently filed and the same are hereby struck out with no orders as to costs. The applicant is at liberty to file an appropriate application afresh for consideration by the court.
11. This file is hereby closed.
12. I so order.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024R. E. ABURILI................................JUDGEI certify that this is a true copy of the originalSignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR