[2013] KEHC 2591 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs and their counsel had provided satisfactory reasons for their non-attendance on 18th March 2013, including illness of counsel and confusion regarding court location. The supporting affidavits corroborated the explanations. Exercising its discretion under Order 12 Rule 7 of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 2591 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Sylvester Nyanje Karisa; Plaintiff: Gilbert Karisa; Plaintiff: Francis Charo; Defendant: Mwangirani Pembe; Defendant: Nicholas Kombe Pembe; Defendant: Robert Kitsao (son and personal representative of the Estate of the late Pembe Murogo Kithi); Defendant: The District Land Registrar, Kilifi; Defendant: The Attorney General
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Malindi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 110 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Application for Reinstatement After Dismissal for Non Attendance
- Outcome
- application allowed; suit reinstated; costs to defendants
- Judges
- OA Angote
- Legal Topics
- Reinstatement of Suit, Dismissal for Non Attendance, Judicial Discretion, Costs Award
- 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
Sylvester Nyanje Karisa
Plaintiff
Gilbert Karisa
Plaintiff
Francis Charo
Plaintiff
Mwangirani Pembe
Defendant
Nicholas Kombe Pembe
Defendant
Robert Kitsao (son and personal representative of the Estate of the late Pembe Murogo Kithi)
Defendant
The District Land Registrar, Kilifi
Defendant
The Attorney General
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Application for Reinstatement After Dismissal for Non Attendance
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs have provided sufficient reason for non-attendance on 18th March 2013.
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to reinstate the suit dismissed for non-attendance.
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the defendants upon reinstatement.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs and their counsel had provided satisfactory reasons for their non-attendance on 18th March 2013, including illness of counsel and confusion regarding court location. The supporting affidavits corroborated the explanations. Exercising its discretion under Order 12 Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court determined that it was in the interest of justice to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the suit, allowing the matter to be heard on its merits. However, the court also held that the defendants were entitled to costs incurred due to the plaintiffs' default, both generally and specifically for the hearing date in question.
Court Disposition
application allowed; suit reinstated; costs to defendants
Orders
- The application dated 22nd May 2013 is allowed.
- The order dismissing the suit is set aside and the suit is reinstated.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT MALINDI
CIVIL CASE NO. 110 OF 2009
1. SYLVESTER NYANJE KARISA
2. GILBERT KARISA
3. FRANCIS CHARO..............................PLAINTIFFS/APPLICANTS
=VERSUS=
1. MWANGIRANI PEMBE
2. NICHOLAS KOMBE PEMBE
3. ROBERT KITSAO (son and personal representative of the Estate of the late PEMBE MUROGO KITHI)
4. THE DISTRICT LAND REGISTRAR, KILIFI
5. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL...........DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS
R U L I N G
This court dismissed the Plaintiff's suit with costs on 18th March 2012 for non-attendance.
The Plaintiff has filed an Application dated 22nd May 2013 seeking the leave of the court to reinstate the suit pursuant to the provisions of Order 12 Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
The Application is supported by the Affidavits of the 1st Plaintiff, the Plaintiff's Advocate, Beja Nduka Beja and Samson B. Kibeja.
The Plaintiff's Advocate has deponed that he was unwell and could not attend court on 18th March 2013 when the matter came up for hearing. He instructed his pupil, Beja Nduke to call an advocate in Malindi with a view of holding his brief.
The Plaintiff's advocate has further deponed that the said pupil called Mr. Samson B. Kimbeja who in turn instructed Mr. Obaga to hold his brief but counsel did not address the court when the matter was called out.
The depositions by the Plaintiff's Advocate have been supported by Beja Nduke and Samson Kimbeja in their respective affidavits.
The 1st Plaintiff on his part deponed that he came to court after the matter had been called out. The 1st Plaintiff stated that he had unknowingly gone to the old court just to be informed that the court had relocated to the new building.
I have considered the Defendant's response to the application.
The reasons for non-attendance given by the Plaintiff and his counsel when the matter was called out on 18th March 2013 are satisfactory. In the circumstances, I will exercise my unfettered discretion in favour of the Plaintiffs.
It will be in the interest of justice to allow the Application for setting aside the order dismissing the suit so that the matter can be heard and determined on merit.
For the above reasons, the Application dated 22nd May 2013 is allowed but costs are awarded to the Defendants in any event. The Plaintiffs shall also pay the Defendants the costs that were incurred by the Defendants on 18th March 2013 when the matter came up for hearing.
Dated and Delivered in Malindi this 20th day of July,2013
O. A. Angote
Judge