[1996] KECA 9 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had acted with reasonable diligence in pursuing the necessary procedural steps to lodge the appeal, including timely application for proceedings and the ruling, preparation and approval of the draft order, and submission for certification. The delay in obtaining the certified order...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1996] KECA 9 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Magana Holdings Limited; Respondent: Lilian Njeri Mungai; Respondent: Njoroge Mungai
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal (Application) 143 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Lodge Appeal
- Outcome
- Application allowed; time to lodge appeal extended to 15th August, 1996.
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeal Lodgement, Certification of Orders
- 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
Magana Holdings Limited
Appellant
Lilian Njeri Mungai
Respondent
Njoroge Mungai
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Lodge Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to lodge the appeal.
- 2 Whether procedural steps for obtaining certified copies of orders were complied with by the applicant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had acted with reasonable diligence in pursuing the necessary procedural steps to lodge the appeal, including timely application for proceedings and the ruling, preparation and approval of the draft order, and submission for certification. The delay in obtaining the certified order was not attributable to the applicant's fault. The court held that, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary from the respondents, it would be unjust to deny the extension sought. The application for extension of time to lodge the appeal was therefore allowed, with the time extended to 15th August, 1996.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; time to lodge appeal extended to 15th August, 1996.
Orders
- Time within which to lodge the appeal is extended to 15th August, 1996.
- Costs of this application shall be in the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
CORAM: OMOLO, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS)
CIVIL APPEAL APPLICATION NO. 143 OF 1996
BETWEEN
MAGANA HOLDINGS LIMITED………..……...........………APPELLANT
AND
LILIAN NJERI MUNGAI)
NJOROGE MUNGAI…………………………………….RESPONDENTS
(Appeal from the Ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Justice Hayanga) dated 13th February, 1996
in
CIVIL CASE NO. 973 OF 1995 (0. S)
************
RULING
There is really no valid reason upon which I can refuse to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant. The ruling the applicant intends to challenge in this court was delivered on the 13th February, 1996. The applicant filed its notice of appeal on the 20th February, 1996. On the 14th February, 1996 the applicant applied for the proceedings and ruling and that letter was duly
copied to counsel for both respondents. The proceedings were apparently supplied to the applicant within time. But to mount a competent appeal, the applicant needed a certified copy of the order and there is evidence that the applicant drew-up a draft order, sent it to Mr. Oduol for approval and that Mr Oduol did approve the draft order on the 2nd May, 1996. That would not be the end of the matter for the applicant for the approved order had be signed and certified by the Deputy Registrar of the High Court. Mr. Lepelley says he sent the order to the Deputy Registrar on the 6th May, 1996 and as matters stand before me, there is nothing to contract that assertion. At page 137 of the record of appeal within which this application is filed, it is shown that the Deputy Registrar certified the order on the 29th July, 1996. The appeal was lodged on the 15th August, 1996. As Mr. Lepelley correctly points out, a certificate of delay is only required in respect of proceedings. There was accordingly no occasion to look for a certificate of delay. In these circumstances, it would be wrong to refuse the applicant the extension it seeks. Accordingly, I allow this application and extend the time within which to lodge the appeal to the 15th August, 1996. The costs of this application shall he in the appeal. Those shall be my orders.
Dated and delivered this 16th day of April, 1996.
R.S.C. OMOLO
………………………
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original,
DEPUTY REGISTRAR