Ruling in HCCA No. E089 of 2024 Mburu Alfred Kigotho T/a Ziwaki Enterprises Vs Lewis K. Koima
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
CIVIL APPEAL NO. E089 OF 2024
ALFRED MBURU KIGOTHO
T/A ZIWAKI ENTERPRISES..........................................APPELLANT/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
LEWIS K. KOIMA……………………………...RESPONDENT/APPLICANT
Ruling
1. Notice to show cause why the Appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution was issued on the 13 th of January 2026.
2. On the 24 th of January 2026 the Respondent further filed a Notice of Motion dated 20 th January 2026 urging for dismissal.
3. On the following ground;
a. That, the Appeal herein was filed on or about 25th April 2024, now over twenty-one (21) months ago.
b. That, the since the filing of the Appeal, the Appellant has taken no steps whatsoever to prosecute the same.
c. That, the Appellant has failed and/or neglected to apply for directions, file a Record of Appeal, or set the Appeal down for hearing as required by law.
d. That, the Respondent was never served with the Memorandum of Appeal or any pleadings herein and only became aware of the existence of this Appeal upon exercising due diligence at the court registry while making follow-ups on his Small Claims Court matter.
e. That, the continued pendency of the Appeal, without prosecution and without service upon the Respondent, is prejudicial, vexatious, oppressive, and an abuse of the court process.
f. That, in the wider interests of justice and the overriding objective under Sections IA and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act, litigation must come to an end and the Appeal herein ought to be dismissed for want of prosecution.
4. The Primary object of the Small Claims Court Act was to enhance access to justice by providing a swift, cost-effective, and simplified forum for resolving commercial and civil disputes. The period of adjudication was with purpose capped and as such it cannot be that an Appellant would move the high court on Appeal, fail to serve the Memorandum of appeal on the counterpart and go into a twenty-one-months (21) slumber it cannot be.
5. The Application dated 20 th January 2026 is of merit as the Appellant failed to show cause why the Appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution.
6. The Appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
7. The Costs of the Application assessed at kshs 20,000/- is awarded to the Applicant.
It is So Ordered
Signed, Delivered Virtually on Teams platform
On this 16 th April 2026
________________________
Mohochi S.M
Judge
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
CIVIL APPEAL NO. E089 OF 2024
ALFRED MBURU KIGOTHO
T/A ZIWAKI ENTERPRISES..........................................APPELLANT/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
LEWIS K. KOIMA……………………………...RESPONDENT/APPLICANT
Ruling
1. Notice to show cause why the Appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution was issued on the 13 th of January 2026.
2. On the 24 th of January 2026 the Respondent further filed a Notice of Motion dated 20 th January 2026 urging for dismissal.
3. On the following ground;
a. That, the Appeal herein was filed on or about 25th April 2024, now over twenty-one (21) months ago.
b. That, the since the filing of the Appeal, the Appellant has taken no steps whatsoever to prosecute the same.
c. That, the Appellant has failed and/or neglected to apply for directions, file a Record of Appeal, or set the Appeal down for hearing as required by law.
d. That, the Respondent was never served with the Memorandum of Appeal or any pleadings herein and only became aware of the existence of this Appeal upon exercising due diligence at the court registry while making follow-ups on his Small Claims Court matter.
e. That, the continued pendency of the Appeal, without prosecution and without service upon the Respondent, is prejudicial, vexatious, oppressive, and an abuse of the court process.
f. That, in the wider interests of justice and the overriding objective under Sections IA and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act, litigation must come to an end and the Appeal herein ought to be dismissed for want of prosecution.
4. The Primary object of the Small Claims Court Act was to enhance access to justice by providing a swift, cost-effective, and simplified forum for resolving commercial and civil disputes. The period of adjudication was with purpose capped and as such it cannot be that an Appellant would move the high court on Appeal, fail to serve the Memorandum of appeal on the counterpart and go into a twenty-one-months (21) slumber it cannot be.
5. The Application dated 20 th January 2026 is of merit as the Appellant failed to show cause why the Appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution.
6. The Appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
7. The Costs of the Application assessed at kshs 20,000/- is awarded to the Applicant.
It is So Ordered
Signed, Delivered Virtually on Teams platform
On this 16 th April 2026
________________________
Mohochi S.M
Judge
2