[2025] KECPT 197 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that there was no affidavit of service on record to demonstrate that the respondents were served with the application or mention notices. The applicant failed to prosecute the application diligently and did not attend the mention. In the absence of proof of service and lack of prosecution, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KECPT 197 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Ronald Oyagi; Respondent: Transmara Sugar Savings & Credit Co-operative Society; Respondent: The Commissioner for Co-operatives
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 05 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Tribunal Application / Ruling on Application for Reinstatement of Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed for want of prosecution; file closed
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Reinstatement of Appeal, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Service of Process
- 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
Ronald Oyagi
Appellant
Transmara Sugar Savings & Credit Co-operative Society
Respondent
The Commissioner for Co-operatives
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Application / Ruling on Application for Reinstatement of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be reinstated after dismissal for want of prosecution without notice to the appellant.
- 2 Whether there was proper service of mention notices and application on the respondents.
- 3 Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for non-attendance and failure to prosecute the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that there was no affidavit of service on record to demonstrate that the respondents were served with the application or mention notices. The applicant failed to prosecute the application diligently and did not attend the mention. In the absence of proof of service and lack of prosecution, the Tribunal held that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant reinstatement of the appeal. The application was therefore dismissed for want of prosecution, and the file ordered closed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed for want of prosecution; file closed
Orders
- The application dated 12/9/2024 is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- The file is ordered as closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Oyagi v Transmara Sugar Savings & Credit Co-operative Society & another (Tribunal Case 05 of 2017) [2025] KECPT 197 (KLR) (27 March 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 197 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case 05 of 2017
BM Kimemia, Chair, Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
March 27, 2025
Between
Ronald Oyagi
Appellant
and
Transmara Sugar Savings & Credit Co-operative Society
1st Respondent
The Commissioner for Co-operatives
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. Application dated 30/6/2024 is for determination. The same is brought under Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, order 10, rule 11, the Constitution of the Republic of Kenya of 2010 and all other enabling provisions of Law.The Application seeks for the following prayers;a.Spent.b.That on hearing and determination of this application inter parties, this tribunal reinstates the Appeal number 5 of 2017 herein which appeal was dismissed without any notice or information to the appellant so that it is substantively determined on its merits since the entire record of appeal and submissions have ever since been filed only awaiting the determination of this Tribunal.c.That the costs be in the cause.d.That inter parte hearing shall be on the …. day of ……2024. The Application is supported by the Affidavit of Ronald Oyagi sworn on 12/9/2024 stating the matter was filed on 11/11/2017 and the Respondent refused to grant information to Appellant which led to delay of compilation and filing of replying affidavitIn paragraph 8 of the Statement of Defence the Appellant states that he only found out when he was filing his Appeal and Written Submissions. That matter had been dismissed on 3/12/2020.
2. He states the matter was only dismissed after 2 mentions which was very hurriedly and procedurally undermined.He states he was not served with the mention notices and no evidence of service was given.He states he has a meritorious appeal which ought to be determined.Applicant states the matter ought to have been dismissed only after Notice to Show Cause was issued.The portal shows the file was still active after dismissal which misled the Appellant to the true status of the file.It is in the interest of justice that the members be heard inter-parties.
3. The Application having been served on Respondent did not elicit any response.As such the Application was undefended.We have looked into the Application and the orders therein.We have further looked into the filed pleadings and note there is no Affidavit of Service filed by Applicant as per the record of 3/12/2024. There is thus no evidence of service to the Respondent.As much as the Application states the same was served there is nothing to show that Respondent was served.On 4/3/2025 when matter came for mention again, both parties were absent and moreso the Applicant.
4. The Applicant’s have not been keen on prosecuting their Application dated 12/9/2024 and in absence of proof of service to Respondent ,a.The Application dated 12/9/2024 is dismissed for want of prosecution.b.File ordered as closed.
RULING SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025. HON. B. KIMEMIA - CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 27. 3.2025HON. J. MWATSAMA - DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 27. 3.2025HON. BEATRICE SAWE - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 3.2025HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 3.2025HON. PHILIP GICHUKI - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 3.2025HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 3.2025HON. PAUL AOL - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 3.2025Tribunal Clerk JonahNone appearance of both parties.