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

Kassim Hamisi Mwachikunya v Attorney General & another [2005] KEHC 2239 (KLR)

[2005] KEHC 2239 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
2239
Citation
[2005] KEHC 2239 (KLR)
Decided
13 June 2005
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureApplication for mandamus dismissedCoramD.K. MARAGA
Holding

The application is dismissed with costs due to defects in the Notice of Motion and the intitulement of the application.

Facts

The applicant seeks an order of mandamus to compel the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Agriculture to pay him the decretal sum in Mombasa HCCC No. 430 of 1991. The application was filed after an earlier similar application was struck out.

Issues

  1. Defects in the Notice of Motion
  2. Wrong intitulement of the application

Reasoning

The application was supported by a statement containing the facts relied on and annexed to it, but the statement is worthless. The affidavit of Hamzaali Jiwaji, filed without leave, is also struck out. The application is dismissed due to the defects in the Notice of Motion and the intitulement of the application.

Outcome

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Affidavit of Hamzaali Jiwaji struck out
  • Application for mandamus dismissed

Authorities cited

Cases cited (7)
  • Order 53 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules
  • Order 53 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules
  • Simon Waweru v Director of GTI Mombasa & Another
  • Commissioner General Kenya Revenue Authority v Silvano Owaki Kisumu Civil Appeal No. 45 of 2000 (CA)
  • Kariuki v County Council of Kiambu & Another
  • Farmers Bus Service & Others v Transport Licensing Appeal Tribunal [1959] EA 779
  • Republic v Minister for Transport & Communications & Others Ex-parte Waa Ship Garbage Collectors & Others Mombasa HCMisc.C App. No. 617 of 2003
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 0.0 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case