[2003] KEHC 555 (KLR)

[2003] KEHC 555 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaint and Verifying Affidavit filed by the Plaintiff misrepresented material facts concerning the status of previous proceedings between the parties. Specifically, the Notice of Withdrawal for the referenced Companies Petition had not been filed at the time the suit was instituted, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] KEHC 555 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kirinyaga Traders Co. Ltd.; Respondent: Joel Gikunju Gathungu & 16 Others
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 234 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Plaint and Verifying Affidavit
Outcome
Defendants' application allowed; Plaint and Verifying Affidavit struck out; costs awarded to Defendants.
Legal Topics
Striking Out of Pleadings, Misrepresentation of Material Facts, Verifying Affidavit Requirements
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Striking Out of Pleadings Misrepresentation of Material Facts Verifying Affidavit Requirements

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kirinyaga Traders Co. Ltd.

Plaintiff

Joel Gikunju Gathungu & 16 Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Plaint and Verifying Affidavit

  1. 1 Whether the Plaint and Verifying Affidavit misrepresented material facts regarding the status of previous proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether such misrepresentation warrants striking out the Plaint and Verifying Affidavit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaint and Verifying Affidavit filed by the Plaintiff misrepresented material facts concerning the status of previous proceedings between the parties. Specifically, the Notice of Withdrawal for the referenced Companies Petition had not been filed at the time the suit was instituted, and the referenced civil case had not been conclusively determined. The Plaintiff did not controvert these facts. On this basis, the court held that the misrepresentation of material facts warranted the striking out of both the Plaint and the Verifying Affidavit. The Defendants' application to strike out was therefore allowed, with costs awarded to the Defendants both for the...

Court Disposition

Defendants' application allowed; Plaint and Verifying Affidavit struck out; costs awarded to Defendants.

Orders

  • The Plaint and Verifying Affidavit are struck out.
  • The Defendants' application dated July 17, 2001 is allowed with costs.