[2022] KEHC 2719 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 2719 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent/applicant's claim of lack of notice of judgment delivery was untrue, as the record showed judgment was delivered virtually in the presence of representatives of both parties, with Miss Kamau holding brief for the respondent's advocate. The applicant failed to provide plausible...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 2719 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Ndanu Jimmy Mauta; Appellant: Sammy Nzuki Mauta (Suing as the administrators of the estate of Jimmymauta Sammy-Deceased); Respondent: Munyalo Marshall
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 444 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Proceedings
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JK Sergon
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Stay of Proceedings, Notice of Appeal, Service of Judgment
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Stay of Proceedings Notice of Appeal Service of Judgment

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ndanu Jimmy Mauta

Appellant

Sammy Nzuki Mauta (Suing as the administrators of the estate of Jimmymauta Sammy-Deceased)

Appellant

Munyalo Marshall

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Stay of Proceedings

  1. 1 Whether the respondent/applicant should be granted leave to file a notice of appeal and appeal out of time.
  2. 2 Whether proceedings in Milimani Chief Magistrates case no. 5299 of 2011 should be stayed pending determination of the application.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent/applicant was denied notice of judgment delivery.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent/applicant's claim of lack of notice of judgment delivery was untrue, as the record showed judgment was delivered virtually in the presence of representatives of both parties, with Miss Kamau holding brief for the respondent's advocate. The applicant failed to provide plausible reasons for not lodging a notice of appeal within the stipulated time. Consequently, the court held that no sufficient cause had been shown to warrant extension of time or stay of proceedings. The application was dismissed for lack of merit.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The respondent's application dated 24th August 2021 is dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.