Please Wait. Searching ...
|Case Number:||civil misc appl 94 of 01|
|Parties:||John Njoroge Karua v Betty Ngendo Gachie & 2 others|
|Date Delivered:||26 Sep 2001|
|Court:||Court of Appeal at Nakuru|
|Judge(s):||Philip Kiptoo Tunoi|
|Citation:||John Njoroge Karua v Betty Ngendo Gachie & 2 others  eKLR|
|Case History:||(Application for extension of time within which to serve Notice of appeal in an appeal against the Judgment and decree of the High Court of Kenya at Nakuru (Mr. Justice Rimita) dated 26th January, 2001 in H.C.C.C NO. 104 OF 1992)|
|History Docket No:||H.C.C.C NO. 104 OF 1992|
|History Judges:||David Maitai Rimita|
|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
(CORAM: TUNOI, J.A (IN CHAMBERS)
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 94 OF 2001 (NAK. 15/2001)
JOHN NJOROGE KARUA .................................... APPLICANT
BETTY NGENDO GACHIE ................................ 1ST RESPONDENT
AMOSAM BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS LIMITED ............... 2ND RESPONDENT
NAKURU MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ........................... 3RD RESPONDENT
(Application for extension of time within which to serve
Notice of appeal in an appeal against the Judgment
and decree of the High Court of Kenya at Nakuru (Mr.
Justice Rimita) dated 26th January, 2001
H.C.C.C NO. 104 OF 1992)
R U L I N G
This is an application to extend time within which the Notice of appeal dated 7th February, 2001 in Nakuru H.C.C.C No. 104/92 should be served upon the first respondent and to treat the Notice of appeal that was served outside the prescribed time as having been timeously served. In my view the application ought to be granted. Firstly, the second and third respondents were properly served with the Notice of appeal. Secondly, the delay involved in effecting service upon the first respondent is a single day; and thirdly, an appeal in respect of the dispute between the parties has already been lodged in court and is pending determination.
I do not believe that the delay of one day can earnestly be said to amount to an inordinate delay so as to militate against me exercising my discretion in favour of the appliMcoarneto.ver, I do not believe that the respondents will be prejudiced in any manner if I accede to the application. The application is granted as prayed for in the Notice of motion of 26th February, 2001 and lodged in this Court on 12th March, 2001. The costs of this application shall be in the intended appeal.
Dated at Nakuru this 26th day of September, 2001.
JUDGE OF APPEAL
Leave to file Reference granted.
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.