REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL SUIT NUMBER 481 OF 2008 DAVID NJENGA WANJERI. …...……………………..…. 1ST PLAINTIFF NAHASHON MUHORO. …………………………………. 2ND PLAINTIFF VERSUS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. ……………………………. 1ST DEFENDANT JOSEPH KARIBU NJENGA. ……………………………... 2ND DEFENDANT RULING The application before the court is the Notice of Motion dated 23rd January, 2015. It seeks, the substitution of the name of Nahashon Muhoro Waweru, (Deceased) who is Plaintiff, with that of the Administrator Ad Litem, Margaret Wanjiku Waweru. The facts show that the Plaintiff aforementioned, died on 10th January, 2014 while this suit was pending. A grant of Letters of Administration was obtained by Margaret Wanjiku Waweru on 16th September, 2014. But this application was not filed until 23rd January, 2015. It is not in doubt that if substitution was not effected with one year after 10 th January, 2014, which in this case fell on 9th January, 2015, this suit would abate. To that end this suit abated on 9 th January, 2015 even before this application was filed. That is to say that there is presently no valid suit to which or in respect of which the sought substitution of Margaret Wanjiku Waweru would be done. It is possible for the applicant to have filed a specific application for the extension of time as provided under Order 24 Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. However, no such extension has been formerly and properly sought. In the above circumstances the relief sought in this application is incapable of being granted by this court. This application is accordingly hereby dismissed with costs. Orders accordingly. Dated and Delivered at Nairobi this 7th day of July, 2015. …………………………….. D A ONYANCHA JUDGE
Original judgment
David Njenga Wanjeri. & 1 other v The Attorney General. & 1 other
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.