[2024] KEELC 3616 (KLR)
The court found that although there had been delay and initial incompleteness of the record of appeal, the record was now complete and the reasons for delay were satisfactorily explained. The overriding objective and the principles of substantive justice require that appeals be determined on their merits rather than...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 3616 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Emanuel Kazungu Masha; Respondent: Charo Maitha Kenga; Respondent: Jumaa Maitha Kenga; Respondent: John Maitha Kenga; Respondent: Duncan Kahindi Kazungu
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Malindi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 36 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss or Strike Out Appeal for Want of Prosecution and Failure to File Record of Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- EK Makori
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Record of Appeal Requirements, Interlocutory Orders, Delay in Prosecution
- 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
Emanuel Kazungu Masha
Appellant
Charo Maitha Kenga
Respondent
Jumaa Maitha Kenga
Respondent
John Maitha Kenga
Respondent
Duncan Kahindi Kazungu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss or Strike Out Appeal for Want of Prosecution and Failure to File Record of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to delay and incomplete record of appeal.
- 2 Whether the appeal should be struck out for failure to file a complete record of appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although there had been delay and initial incompleteness of the record of appeal, the record was now complete and the reasons for delay were satisfactorily explained. The overriding objective and the principles of substantive justice require that appeals be determined on their merits rather than being dismissed summarily for procedural lapses, especially where no significant prejudice is shown to the applicant. The application to dismiss or strike out the appeal was therefore dismissed to allow the matter to proceed to a hearing on the merits.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 20 July 2023 is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
Masha v Kenga & 3 others (Civil Appeal 36 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 3616 (KLR) (2 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 3616 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Civil Appeal 36 of 2022
EK Makori, J
May 2, 2024
Between
Emanuel Kazungu Masha
Applicant
and
Charo Maitha Kenga
1st Defendant
Jumaa Maitha Kenga
2nd Defendant
John Maitha Kenga
3rd Defendant
Duncan Kahindi Kazungu
4th Defendant
(Being an appeal from the ruling of the Senior Principal Magistrate J.M Kituku dated and delivered at Mombasa on 30th August 2022 in Kilifi SPMC ELC Case No. 63 of 2020)
Ruling
1. Notice of Motion dated 20th July 2023 seeks:i.The appeal be dismissed for want of prosecution.ii.In the alternative, the appeal be struck out for failure by the appellant to file a record of appeal.
2. The single issue to determine is whether to strike out the current appeal because the record of appeal is incomplete, and there has been an inordinate delay in setting it down for direction on its disposal.
3. The applicant admittedly expresses the genuine concern that the current appeal is to impugn interlocutory orders issued by the Lower Court, and its pendency is unfair to the applicant as the primary suit still pends.
4. The respondent has expressed the hardships encountered in obtaining the proper record from the Lower Court to prepare an appropriate appeal.
5. I have considered the parties' submissions. The respondents contend that the failure to file the record of appeal was occasioned by the missing Lower Court file and typed proceedings.
6. The Court usually aims to sustain a suit rather than strike it out. For appeals, as proposed by the respondent, it means striking out an appeal without hearing the parties on merit. In County Government of Narok v British Pharmaceuticals Limited [2021] eKLR, Gikonyo J. was of the view that:“[22]. Although the case by the Court of Appeal dealt with the striking out of the notice of appeal on the basis that it was served on the respondent out of time and without leave of the court, the jurisprudence coming through is that, in exercise of discretion to strike out a pleading or document, in this case, record of appeal, the court has to weigh the prejudice that is likely to be suffered by the innocent party against the prejudice to be suffered by the offending party if his pleading or document is struck down. A perfect exposition of the core of the overriding objective of the court in section 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Rules as well as the principle of justice in article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution towards serving substantive justice.”
7. I am persuaded by the reasoning adopted by Gikonyo J. I can see we now have a complete record of appeal. After hearing the parties herein, I should not be swayed to dismiss the current appeal summarily but on merit. To avoid injustice, the application dated 20 July 2023 is hereby dismissed with no order to costs.
DATED, SIGNED, AND DELIVERED AT MALINDI VIRTUALLY ON THIS 2ND DAY OF MAY 2024. E. K. MAKORIJUDGEIn the Presence of: -Mr. Kinaro, for the Respondent/ApplicantMs. Gitari, for the Appellant/RespondentsCourt Assistant: Happy