MOSES MEDZA KUBAI & another v JOHN MAREKIA ( DECEASED Represented by GLADYS MAREKIA (wife and legal Representative) [2011] KEHC 233 (KLR) | Dismissal For Want Of Prosecution | Esheria

MOSES MEDZA KUBAI & another v JOHN MAREKIA ( DECEASED Represented by GLADYS MAREKIA (wife and legal Representative) [2011] KEHC 233 (KLR)

Full Case Text

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURTOF KENYA

AT NAKURU

HCC APPEAL NO 86 OF 2008

MOSESMEDZA KUBAI...............................................................................................1ST. APPELLANT

STEPHENKAGO NDUATI.............................................................................................2ND APPELLANT

VERSUS

JOHN MAREKIA ( DECEASED

Represented by GLADYS MAREKIA (wife and legalRepresentative......................RESPONDENT

R U L I N G

This appeal was filed on 5/7/2008. So far no steps have been taken towards its prosecution. On 17/5/2011 the Court issued a Notice to Show Cause   pursuant to Order 42 Rule 35(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules for the appellant to show cause why the appeal   cannot be dismissed. Ms  Penina Oloo, Counsel for the appellant filed an affidavit contending that attempts to have the appeal fixed for hearing on January 2009 failed, as the lower court file had not been called for. She wrote to the Deputy Registrar to request for the file from   Naivasha (‘PO1’). She claims to have written  to the court and the court replied to none of there letters but the said letters were  not exhibited as per of ‘PO1’. Counsel also exhibited several letters from her office addressed to the Deputy Registrar dated 3/6/09, 3/9/09,5/3/09, 5/3/2010 and 5/8/2010 all requesting for the lower court file but there was no response. To date, no record of appeal has been prepared or filed.

I have perused the letters exhibited by counsel.  It cannot be confirmed whether any of them were received by the court because none of the letters bears the court stamp.   When one writes to the court or files a document it is immediately receipted by the registry.   But for whatever   the letters may be worth, I will give the appellant   the benefit of doubt so thatif the letters are truly  written to the court,  counsel did make an   attempt to have the appeal prepared for hearing but for lack of the lower court  record from Naivasha court. That is beyond counsel’s control.  I will allowthe appellant 3 monthswithin   which to procure the proceedings of the lower court , have the record ready and have the appeal admitted in readiness for hearing. In default the appeal    will be struck out automatically .

DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 17TH DAY OF   JUNE 2011

RPV WENDOH

JUDGE

PRESENT

Mr Oloo forapplicant

CC: Kennedy Ogumo