SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

MOHAMED ABDULREHMAN MOHAMED HATIMY vs KALIDAS KANJI (AFRICA) LIMITED & KALIDAS KANJI & COMPANY LIMITED [2001] KECA 176 (KLR)

[2001] KECA 176 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
176
Citation
[2001] KECA 176 (KLR)
Decided
9 December 2001
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureApplication for extension of time in an intended appealCoramBOSIRE, Kwach, Hayanga
Holding

The applicant's application for extension of time is granted by 7 days from the date of the ruling and by 30 days thereafter for lodging and serving a record of appeal.

Facts

The applicant is the son of the late Sheikh Abdulrehman Mohamed Hatimy, who was a defendant in a previous civil case. The decision against which an appeal is intended was given on 15th February, 1996. The applicant's father filed Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1998, which was struck out as incompetent on 21st July, 1999. The applicant took a motion for an extension of time to restart the appeal process.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has the locus standi to file the appeal
  2. Whether the affidavit in support of the motion was properly sworn

Reasoning

The applicant has obtained a grant of Letters of Administration of his father's estate and claims his intended appeal is meritorious. The delay in taking out the motion was not inordinate and the applicant was not penalized for what was not within his powers to do.

Outcome

The applicant's application for extension of time is granted.

Orders

  • Extension of time within which to file and serve a Notice of Appeal by 7 days from the date of the ruling
  • Extension of time within which to lodge and serve a record of appeal by 30 days thereafter

Remedies

  • Respondents shall have the costs of the motion assessed at Kshs.20,000/=
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case