Case Metadata |
|
Case Number: | Civil Appli 111 of 2004 |
---|---|
Parties: | Gapco Kenya Limited v Salim Osman Talab,Osman Haji Ali Haji Talab,Zera Osman Ali Haji Ali Taib |
Date Delivered: | 27 Jul 2005 |
Case Class: | Civil |
Court: | Court of Appeal at Malindi |
Case Action: | |
Judge(s): | Riaga Samuel Cornelius Omolo, Philip Kiptoo Tunoi, Erastus Mwaniki Githinji |
Citation: | Gapco Kenya Limited v Salim Osman Talab & 2 others [2005] eKLR |
Advocates: | Mr. Omondi,for the appellant |
Advocates: | Mr. Omondi,for the appellant |
Case Summary: | [RULING] Application for adjournment -Prosecution of pending applications - Service of the record of appeal. |
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 COURT OF APPEAL
AT MOMBASA
(CORAM:OMOLO, TUNOI & GITHINJI, JJ.A)
Civil appeal Appli 111 of 2004
BETWEEN
GAPCO KENYA LIMITED …………….…… APPELLANT/RESPONDENT
AND
SALIM OSMAN TALAB ………………..…1ST RESPONDENT/APPLICANT
OSMAN HAJI ALI HAJI TALAB …….… 2ND RESPONDENT/APPLICANT
ZERA OSMAN ALI HAJI ALI TAIB ……3RD RESPONDENT/APPLICANT
(Appeal from the Judgment and Order of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Omwitsa Comm. of Assize) dated 19th March, 2003
in
in H.C.C.C. No. 102 of 2001)
*******************
RULING OF THE COURT
Mr. Chacha Odera who is holding brief for Mr. S.K. Shah, for the respondent, in this appeal applies for adjournment on the ground that there are two pending applications in this appeal and on the further ground that the record of appeal has not been served on the respondent. Mr. Omondi, for the appellant concedes that there are indeed two pending applications which have not been disposed of. He further concedes that the record of appeal has not been served on the respondent. He does not oppose the application for adjournment.
In the circumstances, we allow the application for adjournment to facilitate the prosecution of the two pending applications and the service of the record of appeal on the respondent. Consequently, the appeal is taken out of today’s hearing list and adjourned to a date to be fixed at the registry after the hearing and determination of the pending applications. Costs of this adjournment be costs in the appeal.
Dated and delivered at Mombasa this 27th day of July, 2005.
R.S.C. OMOLO
…………………………………..
JUDGE OF APPEAL
P.K. TUNOI
…………………………………..
JUDGE OF APPEAL
E.M. GITHINJI
……………………………………
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR.