Kikuyu Township Jua Kali Artisans v Daniel N Ng'ang'a,Rahab Wanjiku & Joseph N Momanyi,Messr G D & Brothers [2004] KEHC 1251 (KLR) | Extension Of Time | Esheria

Kikuyu Township Jua Kali Artisans v Daniel N Ng'ang'a,Rahab Wanjiku & Joseph N Momanyi,Messr G D & Brothers [2004] KEHC 1251 (KLR)

Full Case Text

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA

AT NAIROBI

MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO 709 OF 2002

KIKUYU TOWNSHIP JUA KALI ARTISANS ……...… APPLICANTS

VERSUS

DANIEL N. NG’ANG’A   )

RAHAB WANJIKU     )

JOSEPH N. MOMANYI  )……...………...………. ..............................RESPONDENTS

MESSR GD & BROTHERS

RULING

This is an application for leave to file appeal out of time. Judgment was delivered on 1st

April, 1998 and the main reasons cited for not filing the Memorandum of Appeal in time

are that the lower court’s file had gone missing soonafter Judgment was delivered and

that the applicants were awaiting lower court’s proceedings.

Section 79 G of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 21, states:

Every appeal from a subordinate court to the High Court shall be filed within a

period of thirty days fr om the date of the decree or order appealed against,

excluding from such period of time which the lower court may certify as having

been requisite for the preparation and delivery to the appellant of a copy of the

decree or orders:

Provided that an appeal  may be admitted out of time if the appellant satisfies the

court that he had good and sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time.”

The Applicants did not require copies of proceedings to lodge their appeal. All they

required was a certified copy of the decree or order sought to be appealed from. Even in

that case, Order XLI Rule 1 A of the Civil Procedure Rules provides that the certified

copy of the decree or order appealed from may be filed subsequently after the filing of

the Memorandum of Appeal.

Even if one were to consider the fact that the file of the lower court went missing and that

the Applicants were acting in person, they have not shown how that prevented them from

filing the Memorandum of Appeal.

I am not satisfied that the Applicants are entitled to the discretion sought. They have not

shown good and sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time.

I, therefore, dismiss the application dated 26thJune, 2002, with costs to the Respondents.

Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 17 th day of November, 2004.

ALNASHIR VISRAM

JUDGE