RUTH ANYANGO ODHIAMBO & ANOTHER V SHINSAKURA ENTERPRISES LIMITED & 2 OTHERS [2013] KEHC 4081 (KLR)

RUTH ANYANGO ODHIAMBO.....................................1ST PLAINTIFF

KENNEDY ADUOL........................................................2ND PLAINTIFF

(Suing as personal representative of

the estate of John Odhiambo Othim)

VERSUS

SHINSAKURA ENTERPRISES LIMITED......................1ST DEFENDANT

STEPHEN MUNGA KARIUKI.........................................2ND DEFENDANT

CHARLES MUKHANA WANYAMA.............................3RD DEFENDANT

RULING

Before me is a Notice of Motion dated the 30/7/12. the application is brought under order 5 Rule 2 (2) (5), rule 17 (1), (2), (3), 4 of the Civil Procedure Rule and section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act. The plaintiffs/applicants are seeking the following orders;

1. That the honourable Court be pleased to validate the original summons issued in this matter as against the 2nd and 3rd defendants,

2. That subsequently the honourable court be pleased to allow the service of the summons to enter appearance on the 2nd and 3rd defendants by way of substituted service through an advertisement in any one of the local daily newspaper.

3. That the defendants/respondents be condemned to pay the costs of this application.

The application is grounded on 2 grounds that the plaintiffs/applicants have sought to serve the 2nd and 3rd defendants with the summons and enter appearance issued herein since the institution of the suit without success despite several attempts. That the plaintiffs/affidavit therefore seek to serve the 2nd and 3rd defendants by way of substituted service.

The application is supported by the affidavit of Mr. Sumba Oder he  explains the efforts they have made to serve the 2nd and 3rd defendants at his paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 his averments. He has attached a letter to show they wrote to the 2nd and 3rd defendant, the process server’s affidavit of service to show the efforts made to serve the 2nd and 3rd and a letter on the investigations done to trace the defendants. The application has merit. I therefore grant prayer 1,2 and 3 of the application dated the 30/7/12.

Orders accordingly.

Dated, signed and delivered this 19th day of April 2013.

R. OUGO

JUDGE

In the presence of:

....................……...................................................Plaintiffs/Applicants

......................................................................1st , 2nd and 3rd Defendants

……………..…................................…................................Court Clerk

[if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml>

Normal 0

false false false

EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:\"Table Normal\"; mso-style-parent:\"\"; font-size:10. 0pt;\"Times New Roman\",\"serif\";} </style> <![endif]