Skip to content
JudgmentINSTEEL LIMITED VS. KHILNA ENTERPRISES LTD AND ANOTHER1 min read

INSTEEL LIMITED VS. KHILNA ENTERPRISES LTD AND ANOTHER

High Court at Milimani High Court · · Githiru Freda Mugambi

1. The Court is seized of a Chamber Summons application dated 10th March 2025, filed by the firm of Rachier & Amolo LLP. The application is brought pursuant to Order 9 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act. The applicant seeks leave of the Court to cease acting for the 2nd defendant/respondent in these proceedings.

2. The applicant confirms service of the said application, which is evidenced by the presence of the 2nd defendant (the client) in today’s proceedings. Counsel for the plaintiff confirms that he has no objection to the application being allowed. The affidavit of service sworn on 23rd July 2025 confirms that the 1st defendant was equally served with the application.

3. I am therefore satisfied that there is no legal impediment to the firm’s withdrawal and, there being no objection or exceptional circumstances, the application is merited.

Disposition

4. Accordingly, the Chamber Summons application dated 22nd July 2025 is hereby allowed. Leave is granted to the firm of Rachier & Amolo LLP to cease acting for the 2nd defendant in this matter.

It is so ordered.

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN NAIROBI
THIS 28th DAY OF JULY 2025.

F. MUGAMBI
JUDGE
    INSTEEL LIMITED VS. KHILNA ENTERPRISES LTD AND ANOTHER INSTEEL LIMITED VS. KHILNA ENTERPRISES LTD AND ANOTHER