Judgment[1991] KEHC 27
Southern Oil Supplies Co Ltd v SGS Kenya Ltd
High Court at Mombasa
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA Southern Oil Supplies Co Ltd v SGS Kenya Ltd High Court, at Mombasa February 5, 1991 Wambilyangah J Civil Case No 724 of 1985 Civil Practice and Procedure - security for costs – court’s discretion in making an order for security – order XXV rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules - section 401 Companies Act - onus of proof in an applicaton for security for costs. The defendants brought ann application seeking security for costs under Order XXV rule 1 and section 401 of the Compani
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU Civil Case 215 of 1990 M’IKUNYUA IBARI STEPHEN KIJOGI IBARI………………………….PLAINTIFFS versus NKANATA M’IBARI……………...…....……..……DEFENDANT 28/1/91 Coram: SO Oguk – judge Plaintiff in person Defendant - absent Court Interpreter – Murungi
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU CIVIL CASE NO 26 OF 1990 MURUNGI NKAMBI …. … PLAINTIFF versus DAVID M’ABURI … ….
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU crim apps 235,236,238 of 90 GARI & 2 OTHERS………..…………..PLAINTIFF V REPUBLIC……………………….………DEFENDANT ed) (From Original Conviction and Sentence of the Principal Magistrate’s Court at Kisumu (C.O. Ong’undi, Esq, P.M.) in Criminal Case No 189 of 1989) Evidence – secondary evidence – notice to produce a document – Evidence Act (cap 80) section 69 – to whom such notice is given – when such notice can be dispensed with – party who does not have po
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 1124 OF 1983 KIMEU…………….........…………….. PLAINTIFF VERSUS KASESE…………………..…………DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO 4549 OF 1987 BACHITTER SINGH CHASE …………..………..PLAINTIFF VERSUS BARCLAYS BANK OF KENYA LTD…..……..
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CRIMINAL (REVISION) CASE NO 25 OF 1990 REPUBLIC…………….………APPLICANT VERSUS MOHAMED…..……………..RESPONDENT (From original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No 496 of 1990 of the Resident Magistrate’s Court at Mombasa, G M Njuguna, Esq, RM) RULING A witness by the name S Pandya was summoned to appear before Resident Magistrate in the above Criminal Case on 14/8/90 to give evidence. According to the record of the court; the witness did not appear
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL CASE NO 54 OF 1988 REPUBLIC…………………………..……….....…..PROSECUTOR VERSUS MOHAMMED SHIRAZ HUSSEN …….…………………ACCUSED
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU CIVIL CASE NO 191 OF 1985 HARUN MIRUKA…………....….…..…. PLAINTIFF VERSUS JARED OTIENO ABOK TOBIAS OMONDI ABOK….…...........DEFENDANTS RULING The two applicants Jared Otieno Abok (1st defendant) and Tobias Omondi Abok (2nd defendant) ask me by their Chamber Summons dated 20th June, 1989 and filed in court on 30th June, 1989 for several orders, namely, that the judgment entered against them ex parte on the 16th February, 1988 be set aside, that ther
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 30 OF 1986 LYDIA CHAO …………………………………………..……… PLAINTIFF VERSUS DHANJAL BROTHERS LTD MUNGA MUHASO HASSAN ISMAEL ABDALLA PAUL WAMBUA MUSILA……………………...................DEFENDANTS
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO 1926 OF 1990 KAMUNYI………………...........………………..APPLICANT VERSUS MACHARIA & ANOTHER………………… RESPONDENT RULING By a Chamber Summons dated 17th but filed in court on 18th May, 1990 the applicants as defendants in the suit pray, for an order vacating the order in injunction which was made on 8th May 1990 upon an ex parte hearing of a Chamber Summons which was filed on 20th April, 1990. The hearing proceeded ex parte because neither the de
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL CASE NO 54 OF 1988 REPUBLIC…………………………..……….....…..PROSECUTOR VERSUS MOHAMMED SHIRAZ HUSSEN …….…………………ACCUSED
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA HIGH COURT AT KISII CRIMINAL CASE NO 16 OF 1990 REPUBLIC………………………….. PROSECUTOR VERSUS YIENDE…………………………..........…ACCUSSED
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 842 OF 1983 FATEMI INVESTMENTS LTD…..…………. PLAINTIFF VERSUS BAYUSUF……………..………………….DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO 1859 OF 1990 GITAO & 5 OTHERS ……………………..…..PLAINTIFF VERSUS KENYA NATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY……………. DEFENDANT RULING The plaintiffs were members of the defendant Chamber of Commerce and Industry, which I shall henceforth call the Chamber, and which is a company limited by guarantee and having no capital.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
evidence which could not with diligence have been discovered, have been discovered, after the order sought to the reviewed was made, or for any other sufficient cause. The new discovery made according to the affidavit in support of the application, is that it had come to the attention of counsel for the applicant after the order of this court was made on 1.12.89, that the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Hintz v Mwakima, (1982-88) 1 KAR 482, had held that a personal representative
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
d/o Umedram Bhagwan Pandya, (Mena) he thereby waived his right to rely on limitation under Order XXIII Civil Procedure Rules, by dint of the provisions of section 39 (1)(b) of the Limitation of Actions Act. In his view estoppel can be raised in limine, and urged me to hold that the defendant is estopped from relying on limitation under Order XXIII Civil Procedure Rules, a defence he had waived.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
On the prepondrance of evidence before me as a whole, I cannot help reaching the inescapable conclusion on such evidence, that the 2nd Defendant was not an innocent purchaser for value of the shit land. I am satisfied that it has been established on a balance of probabilities that he was very much aware when he entered into a written agreement with the 1st Defendant (Exhibit A) on the 5th of October, 1987 for the purchase of the suit land that the said land had then been sold to the Plaintiff wh
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 686 OF 1986 MOSES WAITHANJI MINGIRE……………………PLAINTIFF VERSUS ATTORNEY GENERAL……………………………DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 414 OF 1985 KANTABEN NEMCHAND SHAH ………..……. PLAINTIFF VERSUS APOLLO BWONYA ORODHO RINAH ORODHO BWONYA EDWARD CHARLES OHARE ………………DEFENDANTS