The application before this court is dated 28th October 2024 seeking orders that this court be pleased to reinstate the applicants suit and the same to be set down for hearing and determination. The cost of this application be in the cause. The application is based on facts that the Applicants herein filed a suit vide the Plaint herein dated 9th July 2019. The said matter had been set down for hearing on 22nd of July 2024 when the court was on leave. The court had issued a notice to the effect that the files coming up before the Honorable judge during this period shall be issued with fresh dates by the Deputy Registrar. On the said date 22nd July 2024, the Deputy Registrar intimated that they no longer had powers to handle High Court and other special courts of similar jurisdiction and that dates would be issued.
The firm of Bitok & Co Advocates did receive a notification from the judiciary through their registered contacts to the effect that the matter had been rescheduled to 29th of October 2024. The said date was also backed up by the date shown on the judiciary portal, which system is used for tracking and filing cases. In light of the information before the applicant prepared for the hearing on the said of 29th of October 2024.
On the 24th of October 2024 the applicants counsel visited the registry to confirm that all the documentations were on record, however he was informed to visit the registry the following day when the files for the 29th of October 2024 would have been retrieved. On the 25th of October 2024 the registry staff did call to confirm that they had retrieved the file; however they had noticed that the same was dismissed on the 7th October 2024 for want of prosecution. He did visit the registry only to note from the file that the same had been placed before the judge on the 24th July 2024 despite a notice having been issued communicating the fresh date. It is on that date that the dates of 7th, 8th and 9th October 2024 had been issued to the Defendants. The firm of Bitok & Co Advocates was only aware of the matter coming up on the 29th of October 2024 and the same is supported by the notice issued by the court and the judiciary portal. According to the applicant, the Respondents shall not suffer any irreparable harm or loss should the suit be reinstated.
The application is opposed by the respondent on grounds that the matter was filed in the year 2019. The matter was fixed for hearing on 25/9/2023 and was adjourned because the plaintiffs’ counsel was bereaved. The matter was subsequently set for hearing on 22nd, 23rd and 24th July 2024. The matter did not proceed on 22/7/2024 because the court was on leave. The hearing was to proceed on 23rd July 2024 however the court adjourned the matter to the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th of October 2024. The defendant counsel served a hearing notice. The applicant have not explained why they failed to attend court on 7th October2024. According to the respondent, the applicant have no interest in having the matter determined timeously.
The plaintiff have not deponed any affidavit to show their willingness to prosecute the matter.
I have perused the application before me the affidavit in response and rival submission. I have perused the record of this file and do find that this application should be allowed in the interest of justice to bring back the plaintiffs to the seat of justice and allow them be heard and that their dispute be determined substantively. The applicant, according to this court has explained adequately failure to attend court. I do allow the application dated 28th October 2024 and do set aside orders issued on 7th October 2024 dismissing the suit for want of prosecution. Hearing on the 6th of November 2025.
The firm of Bitok & Co Advocates did receive a notification from the judiciary through their registered contacts to the effect that the matter had been rescheduled to 29th of October 2024. The said date was also backed up by the date shown on the judiciary portal, which system is used for tracking and filing cases. In light of the information before the applicant prepared for the hearing on the said of 29th of October 2024.
On the 24th of October 2024 the applicants counsel visited the registry to confirm that all the documentations were on record, however he was informed to visit the registry the following day when the files for the 29th of October 2024 would have been retrieved. On the 25th of October 2024 the registry staff did call to confirm that they had retrieved the file; however they had noticed that the same was dismissed on the 7th October 2024 for want of prosecution. He did visit the registry only to note from the file that the same had been placed before the judge on the 24th July 2024 despite a notice having been issued communicating the fresh date. It is on that date that the dates of 7th, 8th and 9th October 2024 had been issued to the Defendants. The firm of Bitok & Co Advocates was only aware of the matter coming up on the 29th of October 2024 and the same is supported by the notice issued by the court and the judiciary portal. According to the applicant, the Respondents shall not suffer any irreparable harm or loss should the suit be reinstated.
The application is opposed by the respondent on grounds that the matter was filed in the year 2019. The matter was fixed for hearing on 25/9/2023 and was adjourned because the plaintiffs’ counsel was bereaved. The matter was subsequently set for hearing on 22nd, 23rd and 24th July 2024. The matter did not proceed on 22/7/2024 because the court was on leave. The hearing was to proceed on 23rd July 2024 however the court adjourned the matter to the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th of October 2024. The defendant counsel served a hearing notice. The applicant have not explained why they failed to attend court on 7th October2024. According to the respondent, the applicant have no interest in having the matter determined timeously.
The plaintiff have not deponed any affidavit to show their willingness to prosecute the matter.
I have perused the application before me the affidavit in response and rival submission. I have perused the record of this file and do find that this application should be allowed in the interest of justice to bring back the plaintiffs to the seat of justice and allow them be heard and that their dispute be determined substantively. The applicant, according to this court has explained adequately failure to attend court. I do allow the application dated 28th October 2024 and do set aside orders issued on 7th October 2024 dismissing the suit for want of prosecution. Hearing on the 6th of November 2025.