https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/12469

Morjaria v Junior & another (Civil Case 285 of 2004) [2026] KEHC 12469 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 12469 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nakuru Civil Case 285 of 2004 JK Sergon, J July 30, 2026 Between Vijay Morjaria Plaintiff and Harris Horn Junior 1st Defendant Harris Horn Senior 2nd Defendant Ruling 1.Before this Court is a Notice of Motion dated 10th March 2026, brought by the firm of Githui & Co. Advocates on behalf of the Plaintiff, pursuant to Section 1, 1A, 1B, 3 & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 9 Rule 9 as well as Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010. 2.The said firm seeks leave of this Court to come on record for the Plaintiff/Applicant in place of the firm of M.C Getanda, Tanga & Co. Advocates, and for the annexed Notice of Change of Advocates to be deemed properly filed upon payment of the requisite filing fees. 3.The application is supported by the affidavit of the Plaintiff, Vijay Morjaria, sworn on 10th March 2026, in which he depones that the firm of Githui & Co. Advocates has acted for him since the year 2007 and is well versed with the facts and proceedings in this matter; that in October 2025 his agent instructed M.C Getanda, Tanga & Co. Advocates, but that his intention was that the said firm act alongside, and not in substitution of, Githui & Co. Advocates; and that it is his desire that Githui & Co. Advocates proceeds to act for him, judgment having already been entered and leave of Court being a prerequisite before a Notice of Change of Advocates can be filed. 4.The Court has before it an Affidavit of Service sworn by Dismus Musana, a duly authorized court process server, on 8th April 2026. He depones that on 2nd April, 2026 he attended the offices of M.C Getanda, Tanga & Co. Advocates at Gibcon House, 3rd Floor, and tendered copies of the Notice of Motion together with the Supporting Affidavit, which were accepted by the firm's secretary who signed and stamped the same in acknowledgment of receipt. 5.The Court is satisfied that service was regular and duly effected upon the firm sought to be removed from the record. 6.Despite service, no response, replying affidavit, or notice of opposition has been filed by M/s M.C Getanda, Tanga & Co. Advocates to date. The firm is deemed, by its silence, not to oppose the orders sought. 7.It is trite law that a litigant is entitled to instruct an advocate of their choice, and to change such advocate, subject to compliance with the applicable procedural safeguards — in this case, the requirement under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules to obtain leave of Court where judgment has already been entered. 8.The Plaintiff has demonstrated sufficient cause for the orders sought, service upon the affected firm having been proved and no objection having been raised.Accordingly, the Court makes the following orders:1.Leave be and is hereby granted to the firm of Githui & Co. Advocates to come on record for the Plaintiff/Applicant in place of the firm of M.C Getanda, Tanga & Co. Advocates.2.The annexed Notice of Change of Advocates be and is hereby deemed properly filed and on record, upon payment of the requisite filing fees.3.Each party to bear its own costs of this application. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2026.J. K. SERGONJUDGEIn the presence of:Rutoh C/AAlwale holding brief Githui for Applicant