Case Metadata |
|
Case Number: | Civil Appeal 42 of 2014 |
---|---|
Parties: | Rift valley Roses (K) Ltd v Benki Lepirkine |
Date Delivered: | 19 Dec 2014 |
Case Class: | Civil |
Court: | High Court at Naivasha |
Case Action: | Ruling |
Judge(s): | Christine Wanjiku Meoli |
Citation: | Rift valley Roses (K) Ltd v Benki Lepirkine [2014] eKLR |
Advocates: | Mr P K Njuguna h/ b for Mr Mbeche for the Respondent. |
Court Division: | Civil |
County: | Nakuru |
Advocates: | Mr P K Njuguna h/ b for Mr Mbeche for the Respondent. |
History Advocates: | One party or some parties represented |
Case Outcome: | Application to be heard interparties. |
Disclaimer: | The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIVASHA
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 42 OF 2014
RIFT VALLEY ROSES (K) LTD……………………………….APPELLANT
-VERSUS-
BENKI LEPIRKINE……………………………………………..RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The judgment of the lower court which is the subject of the Memorandum of Appeal and Notice of Motion filed contemporaneously on 1st December 2012 was delivered on 22nd October 2014. Thus whether the Applicants had been served with notice to attend the judgment or not, the Memorandum of Appeal was filed out of time, and without leave of the court. The preliminary objection reused by the applicant therefore has merit.
2. However, the delay in filing the application is not excessive and any prejudice occasioned upon the Respondent can be compensated by costs. In any event the Applicant has in compliance with the orders of the court deposited into court a substantial part of the decretal sum.
3. In order that substantive justice may be done between the parties without further delay, I will deem the impugned Memorandum of Appeal as properly filed but award the costs of the Preliminary Objection to the Respondent.
4. The pending application will be heard interpartes in the new term on a date to be agreed by the parties. Execution stayed until then.
Delivered and signed this 19th day of December, 2014 in the presence of:-
N/A for Applicant
Mr. P. K. Njuguna holding brief for Mr. Mbeche for the Respondent
Court Clerk: Stephen
C.W. MEOLI
JUDGE