[2009] KEHC 48 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 48 (KLR)

The court found that the delay in depositing the decretal sum was occasioned by the illness of the appellants' counsel, which was beyond the control of both the appellants and their advocate. The court accepted the documentary evidence of illness and the explanation provided. Order 49 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 48 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Industrial & Commercial Development Corporation; Appellant: Joshua Omukanda t/a Eshikhony Agency; Respondent: Hannah Moraa Boruma (suing as the Legal Representative of Patrick Boruma Maranga); Respondent: Richard Mirieri Nyatwanga
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 254 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Enlargement of Time to Deposit Decretal Sum
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
AT Sitati
Legal Topics
Enlargement of Time, Decretal Sum Deposit, Non Compliance Due to Illness
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Enlargement of Time Decretal Sum Deposit Non Compliance Due to Illness

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Industrial & Commercial Development Corporation

Appellant

Joshua Omukanda t/a Eshikhony Agency

Appellant

Hannah Moraa Boruma (suing as the Legal Representative of Patrick Boruma Maranga)

Respondent

Richard Mirieri Nyatwanga

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Enlargement of Time to Deposit Decretal Sum

  1. 1 Whether the court should enlarge time for the appellants to deposit the decretal sum after the expiry of the original period due to counsel's illness.
  2. 2 Whether the deposit made after the deadline can be deemed as compliant with the court's earlier order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in depositing the decretal sum was occasioned by the illness of the appellants' counsel, which was beyond the control of both the appellants and their advocate. The court accepted the documentary evidence of illness and the explanation provided. Order 49 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules grants the court wide discretion to enlarge time for compliance with its orders, even after the expiry of the original period. Since the application was unopposed and the reasons for delay were satisfactorily explained and substantiated, the court exercised its discretion to enlarge the time for deposit of the decretal sum to 20/07/2009, the date the deposit was actually...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Time for making the deposit of the decretal sum into court is enlarged to and including 20/07/2009.
  • The deposit made on 20/07/2009 is deemed to have been made within the time ordered by the court on 30/06/2009.