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

MUMIAS SUGAR CO. LTD v GALIFANO WAFULA JUMA & 2 OTHERS [2008] KEHC 3448 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 3448 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
3448
Citation
[2008] KEHC 3448 (KLR)
Decided
13 May 2008
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from a judgment of the learned trial magistrateCoramFRED A. OCHIENG
Holding

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Facts

The plaintiff, MUMIAS SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED, filed a suit against GALIFANO WAFULA JUMA, NAZIBAU KASSAMIALI BHATIA, and SHABAN MALABA WECHULI. The trial court awarded the plaintiff Kshs.170,000/= as general damages for pain and suffering and Kshs.4,000/= as special damages. The plaintiff was also awarded costs and interest at the court rates. The Third Party, MUMIAS SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED, filed a Memorandum of Appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the appellant (MUMIAS SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED) had complied with the provisions of Order 41 rule 8A of the Civil Procedure Rules
  2. Whether the appellant (MUMIAS SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED) had taken steps to prosecute the appeal within the prescribed time frame
  3. Whether the appellant (MUMIAS SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED) had a satisfactory explanation for the delay in taking steps to fix the appeal for hearing

Reasoning

The court found that the appellant had not complied with the provisions of Order 41 rule 8A of the Civil Procedure Rules and had not taken steps to prosecute the appeal within the prescribed time frame. The court also found that the appellant had not provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in taking steps to fix the appeal for hearing.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Civil Procedure Rules
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