[2021] KEHC 3254 (KLR)
The court found that the appellants had made several documented attempts to obtain the typed proceedings and judgment necessary to prepare the record of appeal. The respondents did not controvert these averments. The delay in prosecuting the appeal was therefore not due to the appellants' inaction but was caused by...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 3254 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Reuben Musyoki Muli; Appellant: James Nthenge; Respondent: James Gichuki Gichuhi; Respondent: Lawrence Gichuki Gichuhi; Respondent: Petr Itugi Kamau
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 321 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Motion to Strike Out Record of Appeal and Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- motion dismissed
- Judges
- JK Sergon
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Appeal Record Preparation
- 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
Reuben Musyoki Muli
Appellant
James Nthenge
Appellant
James Gichuki Gichuhi
Respondent
Lawrence Gichuki Gichuhi
Respondent
Petr Itugi Kamau
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Motion to Strike Out Record of Appeal and Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to alleged inaction by the appellants.
- 2 Whether the appellants have provided sufficient explanation for the delay in prosecuting the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellants had made several documented attempts to obtain the typed proceedings and judgment necessary to prepare the record of appeal. The respondents did not controvert these averments. The delay in prosecuting the appeal was therefore not due to the appellants' inaction but was caused by the court's failure to supply the required documents. The appellants provided a sufficient and reasonable explanation for the delay. Consequently, the court declined to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and dismissed the respondents' motion.
Court Disposition
motion dismissed
Orders
- The motion dated 12th January 2021 is dismissed.
- Costs of the motion to abide the outcome of the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 321 OF 2015
REUBEN MUSYOKI MULI...............................................................1ST APPELLANT
JAMES NTHENGE............................................................................2ND APPELLANT
VERSUS
JAMES GICHUKI GICHUHI........................................................1ST RESPONDENT
LAWRENCE GICHUKI GICHUHI..............................................2ND RESPONDENT
PETR ITUGI KAMAU.....................................................................3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1) The respondents took out the motion dated 12th January 2021whereof they applied for the record of appeal dated 1. 8.2017 tobe struck out and for the appeal to be dismissed with costs.
2) The respondents’ learned advocate filed an affidavit he swore insupport of the motion. The appellants filed the replying affidavit sworn by Mr. Abincha, learned advocate for the appellant to oppose the motion.
3) I have considered the grounds stated on the face of the motiondated 12thJanuary 2021 and the facts deponed in the rival affidavits. It is the submission of the respondent that the appellant has lost interest to pursue this appeal hence the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
4) It is stated that the memorandum of appeal was filed on 3rd July2015 while the record of appeal was filed on 2ndAugust 2017. It is pointed out that the appellants have not taken any step since 2ndAugust 2017 to have the appeal ready for hearing.
5) The appellant opposed the application arguing that they are yetto be supplied with typed proceedings and judgment by the trial court. The appellants aver that they made several attempts to obtain the typed proceedings and judgment. They annexed a bundle of letters written requesting for such documents.
6) Having considered the averments made in the rival affidavits, itis clear that the respondents have not controverted the averments made by Mr. Abincha that the appellants have written several letters requesting to be supplied with proceedings to enable them prepare the record of appeal.
7) I am satisfied that the appellants did not sit on their laurels buthave taken necessary steps to have the appeal ready for hearing. The appellants appear to have been frustrated by the failure by the court to supply them with typed proceedings. I am persuaded that the appellants have given sufficient explanation for this court not to dismiss the appeal.
8) In the end, I decline to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecutionand instead dismiss the motion dated 12. 1.2021 with costsabiding the outcome of the appeal.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED ONLINE VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS AT NAIROBI THIS 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021.
..........................
J. K. SERGON
JUDGE
In the presence of:
............................... for the Respondent
.................................. for the Appellant