[2009] KEHC 3441 (KLR)
The court determined that it could not proceed to deliver a ruling on the two pending applications because the parties had not complied with the court's earlier order requiring oral submissions. Furthermore, the written submissions purportedly filed by the parties could not be traced in the court record. In the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] KEHC 3441 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Henry Oryem Okello; Plaintiff: Erisanwero Opira; Defendant: Sukhdev Singh Laly; Applicant: Lazarus Kibui Ndegwa
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 1784 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Applications; Directions for Oral Submissions
- Outcome
- No ruling delivered; parties ordered to make oral submissions in court.
- Judges
- JL Osiemo
- Legal Topics
- Oral Submissions, Court Directions, Application Hearing, Case Management
- 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
Henry Oryem Okello
Plaintiff
Erisanwero Opira
Plaintiff
Sukhdev Singh Laly
Defendant
Lazarus Kibui Ndegwa
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Applications; Directions for Oral Submissions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court can proceed to rule on the applications without oral submissions as previously ordered.
- 2 Whether the written submissions filed by the parties can be considered in the absence of oral submissions and missing records.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that it could not proceed to deliver a ruling on the two pending applications because the parties had not complied with the court's earlier order requiring oral submissions. Furthermore, the written submissions purportedly filed by the parties could not be traced in the court record. In the absence of both oral submissions and accessible written submissions, the court found itself unable to write a reasoned ruling on the applications. The court therefore directed that the parties must submit orally in court in respect of the two matters before any ruling could be made.
Court Disposition
No ruling delivered; parties ordered to make oral submissions in court.
Orders
- Parties to submit orally in court in respect of the two applications.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
43 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
ELC. CASE 1784 OF 2007
HENRY ORYEM OKELLO………………...……..1ST PLAINTIFF
ERISANWERO OPIRA……………………………2ND PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SUKHDEV SINGH LALY……...................…………DEFENDANT
LAZARUS KIBUI NDEGWA…………..................…..APPLICANT
R U L I N G
As gathered from the pleadings the record is as follows:
16. 12. 08
Coram: Kubo J.
Ruoro – Court Clerk
D. G. Njoroge for Panekh for Plaintiff
K. Mugure for Applicant/Interested Party
No appearance for Defendant
Mr Mugure
Interested Party/Applicant filed submissions on 10th December 2008 on Chamber Summons dated 18th June 2008.
Defendant filed submissions on 4th December 2008.
Njoroge
My instructions not clear. Mr. Parekh’s brother died last night and I do not have Mr. Parekh’s file on the case.
Court
Oral submissions on 12th May 2009.
Signed
When the parties appeared before me on 12th May 2009 the appearances were as follows:
Coram: Osiemo J.
Mr. Parekh for Plaintiff
Mr Mwaniki for Defendant
Mr Oukolea for interested party
Court Clerk – Shikumo
Mr Mwaniki: Submissions have been filed. We request for the date for the ruling of the two Applications.
Osiemo J.
Court
Matter go to 8th June 2009 for the ruling of the two Applications.
Osiemo J
But on perusal of the court record it is apparent that the matter was on 16th December 2008 stood over to 12th May 2009 for oral submissions but when the parties appeared before me on 12th May 2009, they informed me that submissions have been filed on the two Applications and sought for the date of the ruling.
First this was a departure from the order of the court of 16th December 2008 which had ordered oral submissions. Secondly on perusal of the record, those submissions cannot be traced. The parties ought to have addressed the court on the said two applications whose dates have not been shown.
For the above reasons I am unable to write the ruling. I order that the parties do submit orally in court in respect of the said two matters.
Those are the orders of this court.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 23rd day of June 2009.
J. L. A. OSIEMO
JUDGE