[2007] KEHC 1680 (KLR)
The court found that substituted service was properly effected through advertisement in the Kenya Times Newspaper, which is a newspaper of national circulation. The 2nd defendant failed to provide a credible explanation as to how he became aware of the suit if not through the advertisement. The court inferred that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] KEHC 1680 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Omar Said Mwatayari; Defendant: Bharatkumar; Defendant: Vipinkumar Nathalal Shah
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 276 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs to the plaintiff
- Legal Topics
- Substituted Service, Setting Aside Judgment, Service of Process, Default Judgment
- 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
Omar Said Mwatayari
Applicant
Bharatkumar
Defendant
Vipinkumar Nathalal Shah
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 2nd defendant was properly served with summons to enter appearance by substituted service through newspaper advertisement.
- 2 Whether the ex parte judgment entered against the defendants should be set aside for lack of proper service.
- 3 Whether the suit against the 1st defendant is a nullity due to his death prior to filing.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that substituted service was properly effected through advertisement in the Kenya Times Newspaper, which is a newspaper of national circulation. The 2nd defendant failed to provide a credible explanation as to how he became aware of the suit if not through the advertisement. The court inferred that the defendants were properly served and neglected to enter appearance, making the entry of ex parte judgment proper. The court also declined to address the issue of the 1st defendant's death at the time of filing, as the 2nd defendant did not challenge the judgment as a legal representative and the legal representatives of the 1st defendant had not moved the court. Consequently,...
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs to the plaintiff
Orders
- The Chamber Summons dated 3rd May 2006 is dismissed for lacking in merit.
- Costs awarded to the plaintiff.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA
Civil Suit 276 of 2004
OMAR SAID MWATAYARI……….......……………………APPLICANT
VERSUS
BHARATKUMAR……………………………………..1ST DEFENDANT
VIPINKUMAR ………………………..………………..2ND DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
By a Chamber Summons dated 3rd May 2005, the 2nd defendant herein, Vipinkumar Nathalal Shah applied for an order setting aside judgment and for leave to defend the suit. He alleged that he was not personally served with the summons to enter appearance hence he did not enter appearance nor filed a defence. He claimed that the summons to enter appearance were advertised in Kenya Times Daily Newspaper which is not widely read. It is also argued that the suit against the 1st Defendant is null and void in that the 1st defendant was dead at the time of filing the suit.
On its part, the plaintiff urged this court to dismiss the summons on the ground that it has no merit. It is argued that the summons to enter appearance were served through a publication in the Kenya times Newspapers which is widely read.
I have considered the submissions tendered by both the applicant and the 2nd defendant. I have also perused the material laid before this court. It is not denied that this court permitted the plaintiff to serve summons by substituted service by way of advertisement. It is also not denied that the plaintiff complied with that order by advertising the same through the Kenya Times Newspaper. It is the contention of the 2nd defendant that the Kenya Times Newspaper is not widely read. As a result, the defendants did not read the advertisement hence they did not file an appearance nor a defence and in the end interlocutory judgment was entered against them in default of appearance. The case came up for hearing before the honourable Mr. Justice Mwera as a formal proof. Finally judgment was given in favour of the plaintiff on 16th September 2005. I have read the affidavit of Vipinkumar Nathalal Shah sworn on 27th April 2006 in support of the summons dated 3rd May 2006. The 2nd defendant does not disclose how he came to know the existence of this suit. I have perused at the copy of the advertisement annexed to the affidavit of service of Stephen Oddiaga sworn on 16th May 2005 and it is clear that the size of the advertisement was big enough which cannot be categorized as obscure. It is a matter of common notoriety that Kenya Times Newspaper is a Newspaper of National circulation within the Republic of Kenya. I reject the defendants’ submission that it is a paper of limited circulation. In the absence of any other explanation as to how the 2nd defendant learnt of the existence of this suit, I can only infer that he got the information by reading the same of the advertisement placed in the Kenya Times Newspapers of 8th April 2005. I find therefore that the defendants were properly served by substituted service by way of advertisement and that the duo neglected to enter appearance. Consequently the exparte judgment was properly entered hence I see no reason to set aside the same. It has been argued that the suit against the 1st defendant is a nullity in view of the fact that at the time of giving suit the 1st defendant was dead. That may be so but the provision of order IXA rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules cannot be invoked to make such a finding.
Since the court’s jurisdiction was not properly invoked I decline to make a decision on it. In any case the 1st defendant’s legal representatives have not moved this court to consider the matter. The 2nd defendant does not expressly nor indirectly aver that he is challenging the exparte judgment as a legal representative of the late Bharatkumar Nathalal Shah. It therefore means that the judgment as against the 1st defendant remains unchallenged.
For the above reasons the summons dated 3rd May 2006 is dismissed for lacking in merit with costs to the plaintiff.
Dated and delivered at Mombasa this 30th day of March 2007.
J.K. SERGON
J U D G E
Wameyo h/b Shah for the defendant/applicant and Mr. Oddiaga for plaintiff respondent and Mr. Mkan for the necess