[2015] KEHC 8202 (KLR)
The court found that the integrity of court process and the accountability of the process server are paramount. Given the applicant's allegations and the process server's failure to appear for cross-examination despite being summoned, the court determined that it is necessary to compel the process server to appear...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 8202 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Fidelity Commercial Bank Ltd; Defendant: Linear Coach Co. Ltd; Defendant: Alfred Moffart Michira; Defendant: Duncan Mogaka Michira
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 383 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Partial Ruling on Interlocutory Application Regarding Service of Summons
- Outcome
- Interlocutory orders issued; final ruling on application deferred pending examination of process server.
- Judges
- F Gikonyo
- Legal Topics
- Service of Summons, Affidavit of Service, Cross Examination of Process Server
- 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
Fidelity Commercial Bank Ltd
Plaintiff
Linear Coach Co. Ltd
Defendant
Alfred Moffart Michira
Defendant
Duncan Mogaka Michira
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Partial Ruling on Interlocutory Application Regarding Service of Summons
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether service of summons to enter appearance was properly effected on the defendants.
- 2 Whether the process server should be compelled to appear for cross-examination on the affidavit of service.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the integrity of court process and the accountability of the process server are paramount. Given the applicant's allegations and the process server's failure to appear for cross-examination despite being summoned, the court determined that it is necessary to compel the process server to appear for examination on the service of summons. The court emphasized that a process server, as an officer of the court, must be prepared to account for service performed and respond to any inquiry by the court. The outcome of this examination will inform the final determination of the application challenging service.
Court Disposition
Interlocutory orders issued; final ruling on application deferred pending examination of process server.
Orders
- The process server is ordered to appear before the court on a date to be fixed for examination regarding service of summons and his affidavits.
- A penal notice is to be served on the process server warning of possible penal and coercive sanctions for disobedience.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS
CIVIL SUIT NO. 383 OF 2010
FIDELITY COMMERCIAL BANK LTD….…......…………………………..PLAINTIFF
Versus
LINEAR COACH CO. LTD…..........…………………..…….….….....1STDEFENDANT
ALFRED MOFFART MICHIRA……..……..…….....……………..….2NDDEFENDANT
DUNCAN MOGAKA MICHIRA………....……......……………….….3RDDEFENDANT
PARTIAL RULING
Cross-examination of process server
[1] I have considered all the submissions of parties in the application dated 20thAugust 2013, and what is coming through as the major bone of contention is service of summons to enter appearance. Apparently, the decision of the court in the application dated 20th August 2013 may as well or substantially turn on service of summons.The Applicant has made allegations that service of summons was not properly done. I after consulting the record, I observe that the Respondent made several requests and even applied for and summons to appear were issued upon the process server to appear for cross-examination on the affidavit of service which he filed in court, but in vain. One thing became quite startling to the court. How can the process server, who is an officer of the court, file an Affidavit of Service and also a Replying Affidavit to defend a service of summons he carried out but fail or avoid to appear when called upon by the courtto be cross-examined on the service of summons in question?With tremendous respect, he should know that a process server is an officer of the court, serves process of the court and is accountable to the court on such service. His accountability to the court is through the return he makes under the Civil Procedure Rules and therefore, he must befaithful and be prepared, almost in a conditioned reflex manner, to respond to any call made by the court on any service he has carried out. The facts hereinare disturbing and impel the court to seek wisdom provided in Order 5 rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Rules which states as follows:-
“On any allegations that a summons has not been properly served, the court may examine the serving officer on oath, or cause him to be so examined by another court, touching this proceedings and may make such further inquiry in the matter as it thinks fit; and shall either declare that the summons has been duly served or order such service as it thinks fit.”
[2] In light thereof, I order the process server to appear before me on a date I shall fix, to be examined on matters touching on service of summons herein and on his depositions in the affidavit and Replying Affidavit filed by him on the said service. The result of the examination or any such other or further inquiry by the court on the matter will form part of the final ruling by the court on the application dated 20thAugust 2013. The process server should be wary that should he fail to appear on the appointed date, the court will issue a warrant of arrest for him to be produced in court with all convenient speed at such time and place as the court shall direct in the warrants. The said process server should also be served with a penal notice informing him that disobedience of this court order may attract penal and other coercive sanctions from the court. On his examination in accordance with this order, the court will decide whether any or further inquiry into the matter will be necessary. I make these orders in most dignified mood but knowing too well that thedignity of the court is at stake here, thus, the fearless posture I have taken to defend court process for the sake of the administration of justice.
[3] Meanwhile, the ruling reserved for today on the application dated 20thAugust 2013 is hereby arrested and shall be delivered on such date as shall be appointed by the court, but of course after the inquiry on service of summons herein as ordered above has been completed or as the issue of service will have been resolved by this court one way or other.It is so ordered.
Dated and signed at Nairobi this 15th day of May 2015.
-----------------------------------------------------
F. GIKONYO
JUDGE
Delivered and signed in court at Nairobi this 19th day of May 2015.
------------------------------------------
E. OGOLA
JUDGE.