[1997] KECA 319 (KLR)
The court held that, notwithstanding the respondent's argument regarding the lack of Land Control Board consent and the apparent lack of merit in the intended appeal, it would be unjust to deny the applicant the opportunity to be heard on what he considers a legitimate grievance. The court emphasized the importance...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1997] KECA 319 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Gibson Kabuthia; Respondent: Kimani Muthuita (thro' ad litem Joe Chege)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 325 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Extension of time granted for filing Notice and record of appeal. Costs awarded to respondent.
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeals Process, Land Control Board Consent, Void Transactions
- 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
Gibson Kabuthia
Applicant
Kimani Muthuita (thro' ad litem Joe Chege)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be granted extension of time to file and serve the Notice and record of appeal out of time.
- 2 Whether the intended appeal has any chance of success given the lack of Land Control Board consent for the transaction in question.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that, notwithstanding the respondent's argument regarding the lack of Land Control Board consent and the apparent lack of merit in the intended appeal, it would be unjust to deny the applicant the opportunity to be heard on what he considers a legitimate grievance. The court emphasized the importance of allowing parties to fully ventilate their disputes, particularly in matters concerning land. The applicant's prompt action in bringing the application for extension of time was a significant factor. Therefore, the court exercised its discretion to grant the extension, allowing the applicant seven days from the date of the ruling to lodge the Notice of Appeal and fifteen days...
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Extension of time granted for filing Notice and record of appeal. Costs awarded to respondent.
Orders
- Time for lodging Notice of Appeal extended by 7 days from the date of the ruling.
- Time for lodging record of appeal extended by 15 days from the date of lodging the Notice of Appeal within the extended time.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NYERI
(Coram: Gicheru, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS)
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 325 OF 1996
BETWEEN
GIBSON KABUTHIA.........................................APPLICANT
AND
KIMANI MUTHUITA (THRO' AD LITEM
JOE CHEGE..............................................RESPONDENT
(An application for extension of time to file Notice of Appeal and Record of Appeal out of time in an intended appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court of Kenya at Nyeri (Lady Justice Ang'awa) dated 7th December, 1993 in H.C.C.C. NO. 119 OF 1980) ********************
RULING
The applicant's original Civil Appeal NO. 70 of 1996 was on 17th October, 1996 struck out by this Court for noncompliance with rule 85(1)(f)of the Rules of this Court.
Within 14 days thereafter, the applicant lodged the present application seeking from this Court extension of time to file and serve the Notice and record of appeal upon such terms as are fit and just. According to counsel for the applicant, the non-compliance with rule 85(1)(f) of the aforesaid Rules was inadvertent on his part and since the subject-matter of the intended appeal concerns land, it is proper that the disputants thereto should be accorded opportunity to ventilate their grievances to this Court. Considering the promptitude with which this application was made, counsel urged that the same be granted.
Counsel for the respondent, however, while having no quarrel with the diligence with which the applicant made his application, contended that the applicant's intended appeal had no chance of success as the transaction concerning the land in question required the consent of the relevant Land Control Board which consent was not obtained within the prescribed time. To counsel therefore, that transaction was void for all purposes and to grant this application would be an exercise in futility amounting to abuse of the process of this Court. According to him, the applicant's application was only fit for rejection with costs.
The force of the argument of counsel for the respondent cannot be underrated. Indeed, from the annexures to the applicant's supporting affidavit, it may well be that his intended appeal has no chance of success but to deny him opportunity of being heard in this Court over what he may be considering to be a legitimate grievance which in the circumstances may or may not be frivolous may amount to driving him out of the judgment seat. It may well be that in the interests of both parties to the dispute the same should be fully litigated and finally laid to rest in this Court.
Being conscious of the subject-matter to the intended appeal, I would in these circumstances grant the applicant's application so that the time for lodging his Notice of Appeal is extended by 7 days from today's date and the time for lodging the record of appeal is extended by 15 days from the date of lodging the Notice of Appeal within the extended time. The costs occasioned by this application assessed at KShs. 2,000/- are awarded to the respondent and shall be paid to him within the next 30 days failing which execution in respect thereof shall follow.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 16th day of May, 1997.
J.E. GICHERU ...............
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR