[2023] KECA 612 (KLR)
The court found that there was no evidence on record to prove that the respondents had been served with the hearing notice as directed. In the absence of an affidavit of service, and given that the respondents had not filed any reply or submissions, the court could not proceed to determine the application on its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KECA 612 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Esther Chemutai Keter; Respondent: David Kipkorir Koech; Respondent: Rachel Cherotich Keter; Respondent: Stella Chemutai Keter; Respondent: District Surveyor – Bureti
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Application E006 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice and Record of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application stood over for proper service; no determination on merits.
- Judges
- LA Achode
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Service of Process, Appeals Procedure
- 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
Esther Chemutai Keter
Applicant
David Kipkorir Koech
Respondent
Rachel Cherotich Keter
Respondent
Stella Chemutai Keter
Respondent
District Surveyor – Bureti
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 an extension of time to file, lodge and serve the notice of appeal and record of appeal out of time.
- 2 Whether proper service of the hearing notice was effected upon the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was no evidence on record to prove that the respondents had been served with the hearing notice as directed. In the absence of an affidavit of service, and given that the respondents had not filed any reply or submissions, the court could not proceed to determine the application on its merits. In the interest of justice, the court ordered that the file be returned to the registry for proper service of the application and hearing notice upon the respondents, and for the return of service to be duly filed before the matter could be listed for directions and hearing.
Court Disposition
Application stood over for proper service; no determination on merits.
Orders
- The file is to be returned to the registry for the application to be served upon the respondents.
- Return of service is to be duly filed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
Keter v Koech & 3 others (Civil Application E006 of 2022) [2023] KECA 612 (KLR) (26 May 2023) (Order)
Neutral citation: [2023] KECA 612 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Court of Appeal at Nakuru
Civil Application E006 of 2022
LA Achode, JA
May 26, 2023
Between
Esther Chemutai Keter
Applicant
and
David Kipkorir Koech
1st Respondent
Racher Cherotich Keter
2nd Respondent
Stella Chemutai Keter
3rd Respondent
District Surveyor – Bureti
4th Respondent
(An application for extension of time to lodge an appeal as well as to file and serve the Record of Appeal from judgement of the Kericho Environment & Land Court (M.C. Oundo. J) dated 28th May 2021 In Kericho No.73 of 2016 Environment & Land Case 73 of 2016 )
Order
1. Esther Chemutai Keter (the applicant) filed an application dated January 28, 2022 for orders for extension of time to file, lodge and serve the notice of appeal and the record of appeal out of time. The firm of M/S JK Rono & Co Advocates filed written submissions dated February 18, 2022 on behalf of the applicant.
2. David Kipkorir Koech, Rachel Cherotich Keter, Stella Chemutai Keter and District Surveyor -Bureti Sub-County are the respondents.
3. The firm of M/S JK Rono & Co Advocates, applicant’s advocates were duly served with a hearing notice vide an email on December 28, 2022. The said hearing notice indicated that: this application would be heard on Tuesday January 24, 2023; the application would be heard by way of written submissions; and that applicant’s advocates to serve the hearing notice to the 1st 2nd and 3rd respondents in person.
4. At the time of writing this ruling, i realized that the respondents had neither filed a reply to the application nor their written submissions. Further, the affidavit of service is not on the record to prove that service of the hearing notice was effected upon the respondents as was directed.
5. In view of the above and in the interest of justice I order that the file be returned to the registry for the application to be served upon the respondents and return of service be duly filed. The matter shall thereafter be listed for direction before it is set down for hearing.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 26TH DAY OF MAY, 2023. L. ACHODE.....................................JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of the original.SignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR