REPUBLIC OF KENHYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KERUGOYA MISC. SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 89 OF 2013 MBOGO GIKUNJU alias MBOGO THEYA-DECEASED NELSON GACHOKI MURAGE alias GACHOKI MURAGE......................................................APPLICANT STEPHEN MWANGI MURIITHI......................1ST RESPONDENT NELSON DOUGLAS KABUI............................2ND RESPONDENT VERSUS STANLEY MIGWI NJOROGE.........DEFENDANT(DECEASED) ESTHER WAMBAIRE........................INTENDED SUBSTITUTE RULING 1. On 17th December, 2019, the court was informed by the Applicant’s Advocates that one of the Applicants was deceased, and sought time to apply for substitution of the deceased Applicant. The Respondents were aware of the death. The court allowed the Applicant to move and substitute the dead party and gave a mention date to confirm the substitution on the 24 th March, 2020. 2. On 3rd February, 2021, Ms. Wambui Advocate for the Applicants appeared before me, but the Respondents did not despite having been served with a notice for mention. She sought orders on the Application dated 26th July, 2020 supposedly for the substitution of the deceased party upon which I gave a ruling date for the application. 3. I have perused the court file keenly. I am unable to trace the said application dated 26/7/2020 nor any responses by the respondents. In the premises, I opine that the best way out is for the Applicants to provide the court with a stamped copy and the payment receipt of court fees and all responses if any, to enable it to give a further hearing date for the said application and or an order of substitution if it was ever made by the court. DATED AND SIGNED THIS DAY OF 2021 J. N. MULWA JUDGE DATED AND DELIVERED AT KERUGOYA THIS 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 R. MWONGO JUDGE
Original judgment
Republic of Kenhya v Stanley Migwi Njoroge & 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.