Search court decisions

…RESPONDENT RULING This is an application for stay of execution pending the hearing and determination of an intended appeal. It is made under O XLI rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules.…

…The suit came for hearing on three different occasions, thereafter, but was on each occasion adjourned for one reason or another.…

…It was called and was listed to come for hearing on 9th and 10th May, 1989. On 9th May 1989 the suit was called.…

…The main ground upon which the application has been based is that they were not served with a hearing notice informing them of the date of trial. This suit was fixed to come for a hearing on 2nd March, 1989.…

…Consequently it became necessary to issue and serve upon them a hearing notice.…

…Thereafter the suit became ripe for hearing but no date for that purpose appears to have been fixed.…

…That application was listed for hearing on April 14, 1983.…

…consider the nature of the action, the defence, however irregularly it may have been brought to the notice of the court and the question of whether the plaintiff can be reasonably compensated by costs for to deny a subject a hearing…

…the notice of the Court, however, irregularly, should be considered, the question whether the plaintiff can be reasonably compensated by costs for any delay occasioned should always be remembered that to deny a subject a hearing…

…Furthermore, it is also pertinent to remember that the plaintiff herein has premised his suit on the allegation that the commission did not accord him a fair hearing on the bribery allegations levelled against him before…

…At the hearing of the suit the Plaintiff’s witnesses adduced evidence to the effect that c. the accident was due to the negligence of the 1st defendant who was the 2nd defendant’s servant. They were duly cross-examined.…

…Pandya for the Plaintiff was to supply the Court with his submissions within seven days from the date of the hearing. Mrs.…

…them agree that they did hear about that morning and as I pointed out earlier, D.W.4 did admit that he saw PW.2 talking to D.W.1 that morning.D.W.1 was with these witnesses that morning and it is only him who denies ever hearing…

…However, during the course of the hearing it occurred to me that the claim to recover, treble the value of the goods sold was a liability imposed purely by statute and that on the authority of Barraclough v Brown & others…

…The matter before the Rent Restrictions Tribunal (under the Tribunal) came for hearing on 30th May 1985. Both parties were represented by legal counsel, Mr Suchak for the plaintiff, and Mr Keverenge, for the defendants.…

…The application came for hearing on 21st April, 1987. Mr Nanji appeared for the plaintiff/ applicant, while Mr Aboo appeared for the respondent/ defendant.…

…From the diametrical rival positions of the litigants the hearing of the case by the Court and the Court’s judgment was the only possible solution.…

…Each of the two defendants filed their written statements of defence denying their liability to the plaintiff but the court need not narrate these defences because when the suit came up for hearing Mr Juma appearing for both…

…Establishments) Act, cap 301, the Act hereinafter, though the defendant in its defence and counter claim avers in paragraph 6 thereof that – “Notwithstanding what is stated in paragraph 5 above, the defendant shall aver at the hearing…

…Each of the two defendants filed their written statements of defence denying their liability to the plaintiff but the court need not narrate these defences because when the suit came up for hearing Mr Juma appearing for both…