Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

High Court 2502 of 2008

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPEAL NO. 704 OF 2002 ALPHA KNITS LTD……………………..……….APPELLANT VERSUS WYCLIFFE WANJALA MANYONGE…..…..RESPONDENT R U L I N G By a chamber summons dated 31st March, 2006, Wycliffe Wanjala who is the respondent in this appeal, seeks to have the appeal dismissed for want of prosecution, and the orders for stay of execution discharged. It is the respondent’s contention that the appellant has taken no steps to prosecute the appeal. For the appellant it was submitted that under Order XLI of the Civil Procedure Rules there is no power to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution before directions are taken. It was therefore submitted that the application was premature as no directions had been taken. Having perused this file it is apparent that the appellant was requested sometime in July 2006 to comply with Order XLI Rule 8B (4) of the Civil Procedure Rules in regard to the preparations of the record of appeal. To date, the appellant has taken no action. The matter cannot therefore be dealt with under Order XLI Rule 31 (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules as the appeal has not reached directions stage. In view of the appellant’s apparent laxity, this would have been an appropriate matter for dismissal for want of prosecution under Order XLI Rule 31(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. That rule however, can only be initiated by the court. For this reason I will reject the chamber summons dated 31st March, 2006 and order that the Deputy Registrar issue notices in accordance with Order XLI Rule 31 (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Those shall be the orders of this court. Dated and delivered this 26th day of May, 2008 H. M. OKWENGU JUDGE

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.