[2004] KEHC 2398 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant had failed to take any meaningful steps to prosecute the appeal for five years, and the explanation provided—that the file was missing—was unsupported by any evidence of attempts to trace the file or communicate with the registry. The court was also critical of the applicant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 2398 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Ply & Panels Limited; Applicant: John Njunge
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 72 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss or Progress Appeal
- Outcome
- application rejected; directions issued for expeditious hearing of appeal
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Prosecution, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Court Discretion
- 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
Ply & Panels Limited
Appellant
John Njunge
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss or Progress Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant has taken reasonable steps to prosecute the appeal within a reasonable time.
- 2 Whether the explanation for delay in prosecuting the appeal is satisfactory.
- 3 Whether the application before the court should be allowed or rejected.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant had failed to take any meaningful steps to prosecute the appeal for five years, and the explanation provided—that the file was missing—was unsupported by any evidence of attempts to trace the file or communicate with the registry. The court was also critical of the applicant's counsel for misleading the court regarding service of hearing notices. Exercising its discretion, the court rejected the application before it, but directed the appellant to set down the appeal for hearing within 60 days, emphasizing the need for expeditious disposal of cases and proper conduct by advocates.
Court Disposition
application rejected; directions issued for expeditious hearing of appeal
Orders
- The application is rejected.
- The appellant is directed to set down the appeal for hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CIVIL APPEAL NO. 72 OF 1999
PLY & PANELS LIMITED…………………APPELLANT/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
JOHN NJUNGE………………………………………………..APPLICANT
RULING From the record, it is apparent that the Memorandum of Appeal was lodged in the Court on 2nd September, 1999. Unfortunately, for the last 5 years, the appellant has failed to take any steps to prosecute the appeal.
Though the appellant’s Counsel alleged that the file was missing, there does not seem to have been any attempts to write to the Deputy Registrar, Nakuru to assist in tracing the same.
Having stated the above, this Court is not amused nor impressed by the conduct of the applicant’s Counsel. On 9th February, 2004, he deliberately misled this Court by stating that the appellant’s Counsel had been duly served. I am shocked that a Counsel would present to Court a hearing notice that has been served – with some words being omitted from the original. As an officer of the Court, I expected Mr. Mbugua to have been more candid.
In exercise of its discretion, this Court hereby rejects the application. The appellant is hereby directed to set down the appeal for hearing. I hereby order the Civil Registry to grant the parties an early hearing which in any event should be within the next 60 days.
Costs in the cause.
MUGA APONDI JUDGE
Ruling written, signed and delivered in open Court.
MUGA APONDI JUDGE 10. 3.2004