[2007] KEHC 1916 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff's explanation for failure to serve the summons—namely, lack of proper address for the defendants—was reasonable. The court exercised its discretion to extend the validity of the summons, but considered the requested period of two years excessive. Instead, the court determined that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] KEHC 1916 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Nakumatt Holdings Ltd.; Defendant: Sunny Style Manufacturers Ltd.; Defendant: Interfashion Manufacturers Ltd.; Defendant: Ramesh Premchand Shah; Defendant: Shah Hirji Manek Ltd.
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 154 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Application for Extension of Validity of Summons
- Outcome
- Application for extension of validity of summons granted in part.
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Summons, Service of Process, Renewal of Summons
- 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
Nakumatt Holdings Ltd.
Plaintiff
Sunny Style Manufacturers Ltd.
Defendant
Interfashion Manufacturers Ltd.
Defendant
Ramesh Premchand Shah
Defendant
Shah Hirji Manek Ltd.
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Application for Extension of Validity of Summons
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should extend the validity of expired summons to enter appearance.
- 2 Whether the explanation for failure to serve the summons is reasonable.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff's explanation for failure to serve the summons—namely, lack of proper address for the defendants—was reasonable. The court exercised its discretion to extend the validity of the summons, but considered the requested period of two years excessive. Instead, the court determined that a six-month extension was reasonable and sufficient for service to be effected, balancing the interests of justice and the need for expeditious proceedings.
Court Disposition
Application for extension of validity of summons granted in part.
Orders
- The validity of the summons is extended for a period of six (6) months from the date of delivery of this ruling.
- Costs of the application shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS)
Civil Case 154 of 2001
NAKUMATT HOLDINGS LTD. …………………...…………PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SUNNY STYLE MANUFACTURERS LTD. ………...1ST DEFENDANT
INTERFASHION MANUFACTURERS LTD. …….....2ND DEFENDANT
RAMESH PREMCHAND SHAH ………….………….3RD DEFENDANT
SHAH HIRJI MANEK LTD. ………………...…………4TH DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
The plaintiff Nakumatt Holdings primarily seeks extension of the validity of Summons to enter appearance by its Chamber Summons lodged on 27/7/07. The application is expressed to be brought under the provisions of Order V Rule 1(2) (3) (4) and (5) of the Civil Procedure Rules, Section 3A, 63 (e) of the Civil Procedure Act and all enabling provisions of the law. The application is based upon the primary ground that the failure to serve the summons upon the defendant was due to the fact that the plaintiff did not have the proper address of the defendants.
The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by Kariuki Muiga, Counsel instructed by the plaintiff. It is deponed in the affidavit that initially summons were issued on 6. 12. 2001 and subsequently on 13. 8.2002. The latter summons have since expired. It is also deponed that the advocates now have sufficient information as to the whereabouts of the defendants and it is fair and just that the summons be renewed.
Having perused the application and the supporting affidavit, I consider the explanation given for failure to serve the summons to be reasonable. The applicant prays that the summons be renewed for two more years. The period sought in my view would be rather long. I consider a period of six months to be reasonable. I will therefore extend the validity of the summons for a period of six (6) months from the date of delivery of this rulling. Costs of the application shall be in the Cause.
Orders accordingly.
DATED and DELIVERED in NAIROBI this 7th day of 2007.
F. AZANGALALA
JUDGE
Read in the presence of:- Nyakundi for the applicant.
F. AZANGALALA
JUDGE
7/12/07