Navinkumar v Mugo (Civil Appeal E019 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 10819 (KLR) (25 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 10819 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KERUGOYA CIVIL APPEAL E019 OF 2026 EM MURIITHI, J JUNE 25, 2026 BETWEEN KERAI NAVINKUMAR ......................................................................... APPELLANT AND PAUL MURIMU MUGO ..................................................................... RESPONDENT RULING 1. By Directions on the Appeal given on 16/4/2026 in the presence of the Counsel for the parties – Mr. Mwanza for the appellant and Ms. Waweru for the Respondent – the Court reserved Judgment in the matter and directed that – “ Directions on Appeal 2. 1. The Appellant to file submissions within 14 days. 2. The Respondnet to file submissions within 14 days. 3. Judgment on 25/6/2026.” The appellant did not file the Submissions on the appeal as directed on 16/4/2026. Instead, the the appellant filed subnissions dated 29/4/2026 entitled Applicant’s written submissions in support of the application dated 4/3/2026 urging the application for stay dated 4/3/2026 which was already determined by a Ruling delivered on 9/4/2026 as follows: “ ORDERS 18. Accordingly, for the reasons set out above, the application for stay of execution dated 4/3/2026 is declined. 19. The costs of the application shall be costs in the appeal. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10819/eng@2026-06-25 1
page 1 of 2
20. Being a Small Claims Court matter, the appeal shall be expedited to hearing and appropriate directions shall be taken on a date to be fixed in consultation with the Counsel for the parties. 21. The Record of Appeal shall be filed within seven (7 days. 22. Mention for compliance/directions on 16/4/2026 at 2.30pm. Order accordingly.” 3. Although the Court is able to discern from the Appellant’s submision on whether the appeal is arguable that the applicant relies on alleged mistake by “misdiarization by Counsel”, citing Patel v. E.A. Cargo Handling Services Limited [1974] EA 75 where the court held that “The main concern of the Court is to do justice... and to avoid injustice resultin form accident, inadvertence or excusable mistake”, there is no submissions as to how the facts of this case constitute excusable mistake within the meaning of teh patel case, having regard tothe Respondents’ Submissions dated 24/4/2026. 4. In the interst of justice to ensure that that the appellant is heard on his appeal, the Couurt will consider it an obvios error in filing submissions on the application for stay of execution pending appeal, which is alreday determined, rather than on the appeal itself. 5. The Court will, copnsequenlty, allow the appellant to file the relevant Submissions on the Appeal within the next seven (7) days from the date of this ruling. 6. Consequently, Judgment in the appela is reset for delivery on 30/7/2026. Order accordingly. conclusions DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2026. EDWARD M. MURIITHI JUDGE APPEARANCES: Mr. Mwanza for the Appellant. Ms. Waweru for the Respondent. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10819/eng@2026-06-25 2
page 2 of 2