[2000] KECA 63 (KLR)
The court held that, in light of the previous direction that the 3rd Respondent be served and considering his residence outside Kenya, service should be effected by a process comparable to that used in the superior court of Kenya. This ensures compliance with Rule 49 and upholds the right to be heard. The court thus...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] KECA 63 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: The Attorney General; Respondent: Kamlesh Mansukhlala Damji Pattni; Respondent: Bernard Kalove; Respondent: Lionel John Smith
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 321 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for service granted; order for service by comparable process issued.
- Judges
- AM Akiwumi
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Service of Process, Appeals Procedure
- 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
The Attorney General
Applicant
Kamlesh Mansukhlala Damji Pattni
Respondent
Bernard Kalove
Respondent
Lionel John Smith
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 3rd Respondent, residing outside Kenya, should be served with the notice of motion and hearing notice by a process comparable to that in the superior court of Kenya.
- 2 Whether the court should order such service to comply with Rule 49.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that, in light of the previous direction that the 3rd Respondent be served and considering his residence outside Kenya, service should be effected by a process comparable to that used in the superior court of Kenya. This ensures compliance with Rule 49 and upholds the right to be heard. The court thus ordered that the 3rd Respondent be served with the notice of motion and hearing notice by such comparable process, facilitating the fair and proper conduct of the application for extension of time.
Court Disposition
Application for service granted; order for service by comparable process issued.
Orders
- The 3rd Respondent, Lionel John Smith, to be served with the notice of motion and hearing notice by means of the comparable process that applies in the superior court of Kenya.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
(CORAM: AKIWUMI, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS)
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 321 OF 1999 (UR 125/99)
BETWEEN
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ..................................APPLICANT
AND
1. KAMLESH MANSUKHLALA DAMJI PATTNI
2. BERNARD KALOVE
3. LIONEL JOHN SMITH .................................RESPONDENTS
(Application for extension of time to file Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal in the intended Appeal from the Ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Lady Justice Aluoch) dated 11th February, 1999
in
MISC. APPLI. NO. 1296 OF 1998)
************
RULING
Mr. Gathenji: On 1. 12. 1999 the application for extension of time was adjourned by Gicheru JA in order that the 3rd Respondent who was not present, might be served with the related notice of motion and hearing notice so as to comply with Rule 49. By dint of this clear and implied direction that the 3rd Respondent be served with these notices, I move that in pursuance of Rule 17, it be ordered that the 3rd Respondent who resides outside the country in Dubai, be served with the notice of motion and hearing notice by means of the comparable process that applies in such a case in the superior court of Kenya. O R D E R I agree and it is so ordered.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 11th day of July, 2000.
A. M. AKIWUMI
................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR.