DARSHAN SHAH v ROOPAM (K) LIMITED & HEMAL HARIA [2004] KEHC 235 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA

AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)

Civil Case 52 of 2001

DARSHAN SHAH ………………………..............................…………………..PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

ROOPAM (K) LIMITED ………..……......................……...……………..   1ST DEFENDANT

HEMAL HARIA ………….………........................…………...…………     2ND DEFENDANT

RULING

ON A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION

This is an application by the Attorney General that this suit was instituted contrary to seciton 13(a) of the Government Proceeding Act. Namely no notice was issued 30 days before the suit was filed under section 13 A.  The application is being opposed to.

It is noted herein that the suit before me was filed against a defendant.  He in turn took out two 3rd party proceedings whereby he joined the attorney General as the 1st defendant 3rd  party.  This means that the application being ex parte the Attorney General would come aware of the case at the time of service.

I hereby find that  the suit should begin to accrue at the stage in which leave was granted.  If 3rd party proceeding were not filed  nor served after the court giving leave and within the given time there is therefore cause for a preliminary objection

At this state the preliminary objection does not arise and must await the  trial.

I hereby over rule this preliminary objection with costs to the defendants and the plaintiff.

Dated this 9th day of December 2004 at Nairobi.

M.A. ANG’AWA

JUDGE

V. Gosmani for plaintiff

S.B.N. Atambo for the Attorney General