[Ruling] Civil practice and procedure-striking out-application to strike out the amended originating summons by the plaintiffs-where the suit was founded on adverse possession-whether the application had merit-Civil Procedure Act section 3A; Civil Procedure Rules Order 6 rule 13 (b) (c) (d), Order 36 rule 3D; Limitation of Actions Act section 38

[Ruling] Civil Practice and Procedure setting aside-an application to set aside the restraining orders issued against the applicant-application on the ground that the plaintiffs/respondents were bent on using the defendants unit (suit premises) without paying rent where there were references pending in the Business Premises Rent Tribunal-that the plaintiffs were interested in the restraining orders as an end in themselves and had failed to prosecute the references -  where the defendant contended they were suffering loss, arising from the restraining orders-whether the court could set aside the restraining orders where there were other matters pending before the Tribunal - section 12 (4) of the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act

[Ruling] Judicial Review mandamus application for orders of mandamus to compel the 1^st respondent to set down the applicants appeal as an agenda to be heard and determined by the 2^nd respondent further application for a declaration that the 1^st respondents conduct in issuing non-official receipts for money paid with respect to lodging an appeal to be heard by the 2^nd respondent was criminal application based on the ground, inter alia, that the 1^st respondent was charged by law with the responsibility of setting the agenda and convening meetings to be heard by the 2^nd respondent, which he had failed to carry out where the application lacked specificity as to the actual legal provisions relied on for the various orders sought validity of application Civil Procedure Rules, order 53 rule 3(1)

Civil Practice and Procedure- particulars of pleadings-application by the plaintiff to have the defendants ordered to furnish the plaintiff with particulars of their pleadings- where the suit had been instituted in the public interest -claim by the plaintiff that the defendant had failed to respond to the plaintiff’s request for particulars under the rules of the court-purpose of particulars- to ensure certainty and particularity in pleadings, having regard to each case’s circumstances-to avoid a situation whereby the plaintiff could be taken by surprise-application required the defendant company to plead specifically every ground of defence it wished to rely on - the plaintiff commission sought to know the case it had to meet at the trial –whether the application could be allowed-Order 6 rules 8 and 16 of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 22 of the Civil Procedure Act, section 7 of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act

Land Law-boundary dispute-suit to have the defendant restrained from interfering with the plaintiffs quiet and peaceful enjoyment and development of the suit land-where there had been proceedings before the Lands Disputes Tribunal and judgment entered for the defendant-whether the dispute was purely a boundary one-whether the tribunal had the jurisdiction- where the plaintiffs recourse as provided by law was to appeal to the Provincial Land Disputes Appeals Committee -where the plaintiff failed to challenge the decision-effect of-whether the plaintiffs claim was valid- Section 3, 4 and 8 (4) of the Land Disputes Tribunals Act

.

[Ruling] Civil practice and procedure-stay of execution-application for temporary orders restraining the respondents from proceeding with distress for rent pending inter-partes hearing and determination of the application-where the appellant sought leave to cross-examine the respondent on his replying affidavit-whether court should grant the leave sought-whether the application had merit-Civil Procedure Act section 3A; Civil Procedure Rules Order 18 rule 2, Order 39 rules 1, 2, 3, Order 41 rule 4 (1) (2) (6),  ; Distress for Rent Act section 5