The Application dated 7th November 2025 came up today before this Court. There is proof of service, the Respondent did not file a response to oppose the application.
The application seeks a stay of proceedings in MISC E091 of 2025 and further seeks an order that the Court call for the file and review/set aside the decision made by the Trial Court on 25th September 2025.
On 25th September, 2025 the Hon Deputy Registrar delivered a Ruling on an application dated 3rd September 2025, at the same time it updated directions on the e-platform on an application dated 24th September 2025. In the directions, the Hon DR summarily disposed of the application by making reference to the Ruling earlier delivered. However, the application included other prayers that required adjudication on merits.
Supervisory jurisdiction is not an avenue for the High Court to re-evaluate the facts, weigh evidence, or substitute its own findings for that of the lower court or tribunal. The primary role is to ensure that subordinate courts and quasi-judicial bodies act within their lawful authority, follow due process, and do not violate principles of natural justice (e.g., the right to a fair hearing).
I find merit in the application. To ensure fair administration of justice, the directions are set aside, and the application shall be heard and determined on merits. Parties shall be given directions on the hearing before the Deputy Registrar, the application shall be heard and determined before the taxation of the Bill of Costs.
I have perused the proceedings and noted the mention of 19th February 2026 before the Deputy Registrar. The date is retained.
On the orders above, this present Misc. File is marked as spent.
Ruling uploaded on the platform. Applicant to effect service of the same.
The application seeks a stay of proceedings in MISC E091 of 2025 and further seeks an order that the Court call for the file and review/set aside the decision made by the Trial Court on 25th September 2025.
On 25th September, 2025 the Hon Deputy Registrar delivered a Ruling on an application dated 3rd September 2025, at the same time it updated directions on the e-platform on an application dated 24th September 2025. In the directions, the Hon DR summarily disposed of the application by making reference to the Ruling earlier delivered. However, the application included other prayers that required adjudication on merits.
Supervisory jurisdiction is not an avenue for the High Court to re-evaluate the facts, weigh evidence, or substitute its own findings for that of the lower court or tribunal. The primary role is to ensure that subordinate courts and quasi-judicial bodies act within their lawful authority, follow due process, and do not violate principles of natural justice (e.g., the right to a fair hearing).
I find merit in the application. To ensure fair administration of justice, the directions are set aside, and the application shall be heard and determined on merits. Parties shall be given directions on the hearing before the Deputy Registrar, the application shall be heard and determined before the taxation of the Bill of Costs.
I have perused the proceedings and noted the mention of 19th February 2026 before the Deputy Registrar. The date is retained.
On the orders above, this present Misc. File is marked as spent.
Ruling uploaded on the platform. Applicant to effect service of the same.