[2015] KEHC 3939 (KLR)
The court found that the application for leave to amend the plaint was unopposed and that the amendments sought were necessary for the just determination of the issues between the parties. The court held that there was no demonstrated prejudice to the defendant and that the interests of justice required granting the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 3939 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Elizabeth Mwari Maingi; Defendant: Lucy Kanyua Mutungi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 162 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Leave to Amend Plaint
- Outcome
- Application for leave to amend plaint allowed with variation.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Pleadings, Leave to Amend, Costs in the Cause
- 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
Elizabeth Mwari Maingi
Plaintiff
Lucy Kanyua Mutungi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Leave to Amend Plaint
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to amend the plaint to include additional claims and expenses.
- 2 Whether granting leave to amend would prejudice the defendant.
- 3 What timelines should be set for the defendant to amend her defence if leave is granted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application for leave to amend the plaint was unopposed and that the amendments sought were necessary for the just determination of the issues between the parties. The court held that there was no demonstrated prejudice to the defendant and that the interests of justice required granting the plaintiff leave to amend the plaint to include additional claims. The court varied the prayer regarding the defendant's right to amend her defence, allowing her 30 days from service of the orders and ruling to file an amended defence. The court further directed that the ruling be served upon the defendant within 14 days and ordered that costs be in the cause.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to amend plaint allowed with variation.
Orders
- Leave granted to the plaintiff to amend the plaint as per the draft annexed.
- The amended plaint to be deemed duly filed and served upon payment of requisite further filing fees.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
CIVIL SUIT NO. 162 OF 2013
ELIZABETH MWARI MAINGI..............................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
LUCY KANYUA MUTUNGI..............................................................DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
This application is dated 26. 6.2014 and seeks orders:
THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to grant leave to the Plaintiff to amend the Plaint dated 25th June 2013 and filed in this Honourable Court on the same date as per the draft annexed plaint marked “A”.
THAT the Amended Plaint be deemed duly filed and served upon payment of requisite further filing fees.
THAT the Defendant be at liberty to amend her Defence within 14 days.
THAT the costs of this application be costs in the cause.
It has the following grounds:
THAT the defendant has since vacated the plaintiff's premises being shop Number B, facing Njuri Ncheke Street, situated in LR. NO. MERU MUNICIPALITY BLOCK 11/96, pursuant to this Honourable Court's orders on 25th June, 2013.
THAT the plaintiff has incurred numerous expenses which include fees, costs of renovating the premises, security guards and eviction process and there is need to amend the plaint to include a claim of Kshs.262,000/= being the total sum thereof.
THAT in the interest of justice and fairness the Plaintiff be granted leave to amend the Plaint herein for the Court to effectually determine all the matters between the parties.
THAT the proposed further amendments will not occasion any prejudice to the Defendant.
On 29. 6.2015, the Court made a finding that the application was not opposed. In the circumstances, I allow the application with a variation that prayer 3 is allowed with the defendant being allowed to file her defence within 30 days after service of the orders issued by the Court today and this ruling.
I order the defendant to serve this ruling upon the defendant within 14 days.
Costs shall be in the cause.
Delivered in Open Court at Meru this 29th day of June, 2015 in the preence of:
Cc. Lilian/Daniel
Mutura h/b Muthomi for the plaintiff
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE