[2024] KEELC 458 (KLR)
The court determined that although the 1st Interested Party had failed to file its defence for five years without a plausible explanation, the overriding interest of justice and the right to be heard justified granting leave to admit the defence. The court noted that the hearing had not commenced and the pretrial...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 458 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Deepak Harakchand Dodhia; Defendant: Anmol Limited; Defendant: Superfit Steelcon Ltd; Interested Party: Director Of Physical Planning; Interested Party: National Environment Management Authority; Interested Party: National Construction Authority
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 245 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Leave to Admit Defence Out of Time
- Outcome
- Application for leave to admit defence out of time granted.
- Judges
- LN Mbugua
- Legal Topics
- Late Filing of Pleadings, Leave to File Defence, Right to Be Heard, Pretrial 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
Deepak Harakchand Dodhia
Plaintiff
Anmol Limited
Defendant
Superfit Steelcon Ltd
Defendant
Director Of Physical Planning
Interested Party
National Environment Management Authority
Interested Party
National Construction Authority
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Leave to Admit Defence Out of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st Interested Party should be granted leave to admit its defence out of time.
- 2 Whether the delay in filing pleadings by the 1st Interested Party is excusable.
- 3 Whether the right to be heard outweighs procedural non-compliance in this context.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that although the 1st Interested Party had failed to file its defence for five years without a plausible explanation, the overriding interest of justice and the right to be heard justified granting leave to admit the defence. The court noted that the hearing had not commenced and the pretrial had not been conducted due to administrative issues. The court exercised its discretion to allow the late filing, emphasizing that the right to be heard should not be unduly curtailed by procedural technicalities, especially where no prejudice would be suffered by the other parties and the matter had not taken off. The court balanced the need for procedural compliance with the...
Court Disposition
Application for leave to admit defence out of time granted.
Orders
- Leave is granted to the 1st Interested Party to have their defence dated 30.1.2024 admitted as a pleading.
- The 1st Interested Party may either adjourn the case to prepare witness statements and documentary evidence or proceed with the hearing without calling evidence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
Dodhia v Anmol Limited & another; Director of Physical Planning & 2 others (Interested Parties) (Environment & Land Case 245 of 2018) [2024] KEELC 458 (KLR) (30 January 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 458 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment & Land Case 245 of 2018
LN Mbugua, J
January 30, 2024
Between
Deepak Harakchand Dodhia
Plaintiff
and
Anmol Limited
1st Defendant
Superfit Steelcon Ltd
2nd Defendant
and
Director Of Physical Planning
Interested Party
National Environment Management Authority
Interested Party
National Construction Authority
Interested Party
Ruling
1. This ruling is in respect of the application made by counsel for the 1st Interested Party to have their defence dated today (30. 1.2024) admitted as their pleading.
2. I find that this case is 5 years old, and the 1st Interested Party has apparently been present in these proceedings from inception. Their current advocate admit to having come on record on 8. 3.2022, that is a period of almost two years.
3. On 11. 5.2023 the court gave strict timelines on compliance relating to filing of documents of which the matter was given both a hearing date (of today 30. 1.2024) and a pretrial trial date (on 25. 10. 2023). Sadly, it has emerged that the matter was not cause listed on 25. 10. 2023, hence the court was not able to carry out the pretrial exercise, the one that precedes the main hearing. The 1st Interested Party has not given any plausible explanation as to why they have not filed pleadings for the last 5 years.
4. Nevertheless, noting that the matter has not taken off, in the interest of justice and the right to be heard, as well as the fact that the court has not conducted a pretrial, the court hereby grants leave to the 1st Interested Party to have their defence admitted as a pleading. Since the 1st Interested Party has no witness statements and documentary evidence, the court gives them two options:1. The court is willing to adjourn the case to enable the1st Interested Party to gather their witness statements and documentary evidence or;2. They can opt to proceed with the hearing today without calling any evidence.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS.LUCY N. MBUGUAJUDGEIn the presence of:-Aaron Kinyanjui for PlaintiffShah for 1st DefendantIsindu for 2nd DefendantM/s Korir holding brief for Itugi for 3rd Interested PartyM/s Wanjala holding brief for M/s Nderu for 1st Interested PartyKorir holding brief for Mr. Ugana for 2nd Interested PartyPlaintiffAswin director of 2nd DefendantCourt assistant: Eddel