Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in judgment· [2018] KEELC 297 (KLR)

James Onyongo Obuki v Omondi Ogutu; Omondi Ogutu (Interested Party) [2018] KEELC 297 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
11 December 2018
364 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court in Nairobi allowed an unopposed application to rebuild a lost court file from copies of the pleadings and documents the parties already held.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an unopposed Notice of Motion dated 25th April 2017 brought under Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, seeking reconstruction of a court file that had disappeared from the registry and could not be traced. The application was supported by the affidavit of Ben Oluoch Olunya Advocate, sworn on 25th April 2017, and was disposed of by way of written submissions following a court direction. The intended interested party, who claimed to be the registered owner of the suit property, submitted that the file had disappeared and that he deserved to be enjoined to the suit, relying on Rajabali vs Kutubdin A. Khanbai & 2 Others, Civil Suit No. 190 of 2012. The plaintiff and defendant were duly served but filed neither grounds of opposition nor a replying affidavit. The judge found the reasons advanced for reconstruction plausible, concluded that the application had merit, and granted the orders sought: that the court file be reconstructed; that reconstruction be on the basis of the copies of the pleadings and documents filed; that upon reconstruction the Deputy Registrar ensure the safe keeping of the reconstructed file; and that costs of the application be on the cause. The judgment was delivered in Nairobi on 11th December 2018 by L. Komingoi, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the application for reconstruction of the court file was merited

Holding

The court found the reasons given for reconstruction plausible and granted the orders sought, including that reconstruction be based on the copies of pleadings and documents filed.

Reasoning

The application was brought under Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010. The intended interested party submitted that the court file had disappeared from the registry and could not be traced, and that he deserved to be enjoined as the registered owner of the suit property. The application was unopposed; the plaintiff and defendant, though served, filed no grounds of opposition or replying affidavit. Finding the reasons plausible, the court granted the orders sought with costs on the cause.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a court file has disappeared from the registry and cannot be traced, the court may order its reconstruction on the basis of copies of the pleadings and documents on record where plausible reasons are given.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.That the court file be reconstructed
  2. 2.That the said reconstruction be on the basis of the copies of the pleadings and the documents filed herewith
  3. 3.That upon reconstruction the Deputy Registrar to ensure the safe keeping of the reconstructed file
  4. 4.That the costs of this application be on the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B and 3A
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010Order 51 Rule 1

Cases cited (1)

  • Rajabali vs Kutubdin A. Khanbai & 2 Others
    Civil Suit No. 190 of 2012
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "James Onyongo Obuki v Omondi Ogutu; Omondi Ogutu (Interested Party) [2018] KEELC 297 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/297/eng@2018-12-11

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.