Judgment[1987] KEHC 84
Chinga Tea Factory Company Ltd v Miugu General Transport Co Ltd
High Court at Nairobi
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO. 1495 OF 1982 CHINGA TEA FACTORY COMPANY LTD….....…………….PLAINTIFF VERSUS MIUGU GENERAL TRANSPORT CO LTD………………DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO. 1967 OF 1982 ABUBAKAR SIMBA …………..……………………..
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI LAW COURTS) CIVIL CASE NO 1333 ‘B’ OF 1982 WAITHERERO……………………….………PLAINTIFF V KIMUNYE INVESTMENTS…......…………..DEFENDANT RULING The defendant herein Kimunye Investments Ltd, moved the court under Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21) asking for orders that:- “The sale of motor-vehicle Reg No KTJ 996, in August 1986 or thereabouts be set aside for being illegal and or fraudulent and unjust.” The application was supported b
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
Umoja Enterprises Limited pending the hearing and final disposal of this suit. In making the above order the court must consider that the injunction might or could operate oppressively to the defendants especially as amended.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO 1414 OF 1980 JUMA KHAMISI KARIUKI ….…..………………………………..….………PLAINTIFF versus EAST AFRICA INDUSTRIES LIMITED AND GEORGE OKOKO ….….DEFENDANTS
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO.3923 OF 1985 KIGIKA DEVELOPERS LIMITED.........................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS NAIROBI CITY COMMISSION...........................................................DEFENDANT RULING This matter originally came before me on an application to strike out the defence. I struck out the defence but as the action was somewhat unusual I refused to give judgment, but directed that the case be set down for
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO.3923 OF 1985 KIGIKA DEVELOPERS LIMITED.........................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS NAIROBI CITY COMMISSION...........................................................DEFENDANT RULING This matter originally came before me on an application to strike out the defence. I struck out the defence but as the action was somewhat unusual I refused to give judgment, but directed that the case be set down for
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE 3452 OF 1984 JOSEPH MUTUNGA WAMBUA............................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS KANTILAL KHIMJI PATEL & ANOTHER..........................DEFENDANT
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
The application which is expressed to be brought under order 94 rule 10 and 11, order XXI rule 22, order XII rule 1 and order XXII rule 11(1) and (2) Civil Procedure Rules was filed on 27th, two days before the date fixed for the sale of goods attached in the suit to recover the amount of the decree. The goods include, an air compressor, two sand blasting units, three air spray guns, three tool kits and some spare parts.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Civil Case 3586 of 1985 LOCHAB TRANSPORT LTD .........................................................................APPLICANT VERSUS KENYA ARAB ORIENT INSURANCE LTD...............................................DEFEDANT
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO,S1288 & 1239 of 1984 1.L.L 2.P.M.........................................................................PLAINTIFFS VERSUS 1.JARED.A.AYUKU 2.KIPLANGAT ARAP CHEPKUL........................DEFENDANTS
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO. 1252 OF 1985 MBUTHIA........................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS NAIROBI CITY COMMISSION.................DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS CIVIL CASE NO. 74 OF 1983 PAOLO BENCIVENGA......................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS GILBERT AMIMO..........................................................DEFENDANT
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCriminal Case
tends as a direction to the Court hearing the application for Order of Prohibition to grant the Order without using its own discretion whether it should do so. The Attorney-General did not need any authority, nor a reminder, that in the light of the opinions expressed by the Constitutional Court he could terminate the proceedings even when coupled with a wet hope that he would do so.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO. 2260 OF 1982 NEWSTANLEY HOTEL LIMITED ...................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS ARCADE TOBACCONISTS LIMITED..........................................DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
Republic of Kenya High Court, at Mombasa Civil Cases Nos 325 & 326 of 1978 Roba v Jarso Cases No cases referred to. Statutes Government Proceedings Act, (cap 40) section 12 October 28, 1985, Bhandari J delivered the following Judgment.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
Attorney General v Saeed High Court, at Mombasa July 29, 1985 Aragon J Civil Case No 584 of 1977 July 29, 1985, Aragon J delivered the following Ruling. This is an application by Messrs A Y A Jiwaji & Jiwaji who are now acting for the defendant for dismissal of this suit for want of prosecution.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO 772 OF 1984 AURORA BAKING COMPANY (1975) LTD………………PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT AND PHENNTHA WANINGI AND 3 OTHERS………….DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS RULING By an order of this court dated 19.11.84 the hearing of the plaintiff’s/applicant’s application filed in this court on 13.11.84 was stood over to 8.1.85 before the Duty Judge and the caveat lodged in respect of L R No.10445/3 situated in Nyandarua District was extended pending the disposa
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA Obilo v Angila High Court, at Kisii May 14, 1985 Masime J Civil Case No 51 of 1985 May 14, 1985, Masime J delivered the following Ruling. This is an application by way of chamber summons for an order to restrain the second respondent South Nyanza Company Limited from realizing the proceeds of some 56.77 tones of sugar cane delivered by the 1st respondent Silvanus Omolo Angila out of land title number Kamagambo/Kanyawanga/164; there is also a prayer for an order for the costs
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA Obilo v Angila High Court, at Kisii May 14, 1985 Masime J Civil Case No 51 of 1985 May 14, 1985, Masime J delivered the following Ruling. This is an application by way of chamber summons for an order to restrain the second respondent South Nyanza Company Limited from realizing the proceeds of some 56.77 tones of sugar cane delivered by the 1st respondent Silvanus Omolo Angila out of land title number Kamagambo/Kanyawanga/164; there is also a prayer for an order for the costs