Civil Case 34 of 2007

Help

Advanced Search mode is suitable for finding a particular case when you have details that describe the case at hand e.g. (names of parties, case number, case year etc).
To find a case according to its meta data (names of parties, case number, and date of delivery, case year etc) one need not fill in all the fields. You may use any one or more search criteria; search using whatever information you have..

Download: PDF DOC DOCX PDF With Metadata Docx With Metadata XML Show Metadata

Jim Matia Bandi v Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & another [2010] eKLR

Case Metadata
Case Number:	Civil Case 34 of 2007
Parties:	Jim Matia Bandi v Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & Madison Insurance Company
Date Delivered:	29 Apr 2010
Case Class:	Civil
Court:	High Court at Eldoret
Case Action:	Ruling
Judge(s):	Mary Atieno Ang'awa
Citation:	Jim Matia Bandi v Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & another [2010] eKLR
Advocates:	Angu Kitigin for the Plaintiff W M Simiyu for the 2nd Defendant A Yano for the 1st Defendant
Court Division:	Civil
Parties Profile:	Individual v Bank
County:	Uasin Gishu
Advocates:	Angu Kitigin for the Plaintiff W M Simiyu for the 2nd Defendant A Yano for the 1st Defendant
Case Summary:	..
History Advocates:	Both Parties Represented
Case Outcome:	Suit struck out
Sum Awarded:	none
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 ELDORET
Civil Case 34 of 2007

JIM MATIA BANDI................................................................................PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

KENYA COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED.........................................1^ST DEFENDANT

THE MADISON INSURANCE COMPANY...........................................2^ND DEFENDANT

RULING

PRELIMINARY OBJECTION

Background

1. In this Commercial Law matter the plaintiff filed suit in person on 5^th March 2007. He made claims against a bank 1^st defendant and an Insurance Company 2^nd defendant whereby he claims that he had been deprived of his standing ordered premiums that he had ordered the bank to remit to the 2^nd defendant.

1. The bank and Insurance Company’s action was irregular. He prays for compensation loss and damages.
Preliminary Objection

3. Both the 1^st and 2^nd defendant separately sought for the striking out of the plaintiffs, plaint by the 1^st defendant, that the suit is time barred by the 2^nd defendant. By the 2^nd defendant, that the particularization of the claims made was not done according to order VI r 8 Civil Procedure Rules (The 1^st defendant was absent from these proceeding.)

4. In reply, the advocate for the plaintiff who has come on record stated that we cannot go into the issue of technicalities under order XLIV r 6 Civil Procedure Rules

Findings:

5. Jurisdiction goes to the root of a case. The claim has been filed for matters in the early 1990’s. These claims are time barred but the plaintiff had an opportunity to seek leave to file the said suit out of time.

6. The plaint required to be particularized. This was not fatal and an amendment could have been taken.

7. This court herein rules that the preliminary objection be and is hereby upheld on the issue of limitation of action.

8. This suit is time barred. It is struck out. I make no orders as to costs because the issue was raised in 2008 about a year later. The delay was inordinate.

9. Costs to the defendant No. 2 but not defendant No 1 as they are absent.

Dated this 29^th day of April, 2010 at Eldoret

M. A. ANG’AWA

JUDGE

22/04/2010

Advocate: -

Angu Kitigin advocate instructed by the Firm of M/s Angu Kitigin & Company Advocates

for the Plaintiff

W.M. Simiyu advocate instructed by the Firm of M/s W.M. Simiyu & Company

Advocates for 2^nd Defendant,

A. Yano advocate instructed by the Firm of M/s Yano & Company Advocates

for the 1^st Defendant.

Download PDF DOC DOCX PDF With Metadata Docx With Metadata XML

Please enter advanced search options

Case Content:		Subject:
Case Number:		Parties:
Judge:		Court:
	Delivery Date Range:
From:		To:

Except for some material which is expressly stated to be under a specified Creative Commons license, the contents of this website are in the public domain and free from any copyright restrictions

Case Search

Civil Case 34 of 2007

Case Metadata

Please enter advanced search options