Mungai Njoroge & another v Kiarie Njoroge & another [2019] KECA 406 (KLR)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- 406
- Citation
- [2019] KECA 406 (KLR)
- Decided
- 6 August 2019
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureApplication for substitution of the deceased appellant with the legal representative of his Estate and an application for leave to amend the memorandum of appealCoramA.K. MURGOR
Holding
The application for leave to amend the memorandum of appeal is granted. The applicant is ordered to file and serve a supplementary record of appeal comprising the amended memorandum of appeal within the next fourteen days from the date of this ruling.
Facts
The deceased appellant, Mungai Njoroge, passed away, and his personal representative, Ng’ang’a Mungai Muhindi, filed an application for substitution and amendment of the memorandum of appeal.
Issues
- The trial judge based the decision on probability rather than on the facts that were before the court.
- The trial court was wrong in finding that the respondents had proved their case when critical facts were not proved.
- The trial court wrongly failed to find that the respondents had already received their share of inheritance.
- The trial court shifted the burden of proof to the appellant, when at all times the responsibility remained with the respondent.
Reasoning
The amendments are necessary to clarify the issues in contention and avoid a multiplicity of suits. The amendments do not introduce new or inconsistent causes of action, affect vested interests, or cause injustice to the other side.
Outcome
The application is granted.
Orders
- The applicant is ordered to file and serve a supplementary record of appeal comprising the amended memorandum of appeal within the next fourteen days from the date of this ruling.
Remedies
- The applicant is ordered to file and serve a supplementary record of appeal comprising the amended memorandum of appeal within the next fourteen days from the date of this ruling.
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.
Loading judgment…