1. The application dated 12/6/2024 has been filed by the plaintiffs. They seek that their suit, which was dismissed on 31/1/2024 for non-attendance be reinstated for hearing. They also seek orders that the respondents be restrained from interfering with the plaintiffs’ ownership of the suit property pending the hearing and determination of the suit. The application is premised on the grounds set out at its foot and in the supporting affidavit of the 1st plaintiff attached thereto. The grounds are that the applicant’s advocate was logged into 5 different courts at the same time and as he was addressing another court this court dismissed the suit. It is stated that on that day the plaintiffs had travelled all the way to Malindi to attend the hearing and they were ready to be heard, and the mistakes of their advocate should not be visited upon them.
2. The application was served. However, it is unopposed. The applicant filed undated submissions which I have perused. I am persuaded that the applicants should not be made to pay for the mistakes of their counsel and that the application ought to be granted so that their case can be reinstated and determined on its merits.
3. Consequently, I hereby allow the motion dated 12/6/2024 in terms of prayers no. 2 and 3 thereof. The costs of the said application shall be in the cause. This matter shall be listed for hearing of the substantive suit on 8/4/2025.
2. The application was served. However, it is unopposed. The applicant filed undated submissions which I have perused. I am persuaded that the applicants should not be made to pay for the mistakes of their counsel and that the application ought to be granted so that their case can be reinstated and determined on its merits.
3. Consequently, I hereby allow the motion dated 12/6/2024 in terms of prayers no. 2 and 3 thereof. The costs of the said application shall be in the cause. This matter shall be listed for hearing of the substantive suit on 8/4/2025.