Search court decisions

…The application does not specify the duration of the injunction Order sought but the supporting affidavit seems to indicated that the injunction order is sought until plaintiffs are able to sell L.R Nairobi Block 195/65 and…

…I have studied the plaint and the affidavit to support the application and the annexed documents.…

…There was only one accompanying affidavit in support and that was by Nyamogo, the 1st applicant. The detailed acts of refusal are deponed to therein.…

…However, in his replying affidavit sworn on 16th November, 1993, and filed on the same day Mr Malakwen states and we quote: “I have now seen the notice of motion dated 28th October, 1993, and an affidavit sworn by one Mr…

…The applicant states in his affidavit why he has found himself in this situation. It would appear that if his financial position improves he would be in a position to liquidate the decretal amount.…

…The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr. Gitobu Imanyara, Advocate who appeared for the Applicant. There are several annexures to the affidavit. I have perused them all.…

…XXXVI rule 3D of the Civil Procedure Rules – the Rules provides that: “3D (1) An application under section 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act shall be made by Originating Summons. (2) The summons shall be supported by an affidavit…

…Summons dated 28th October, 1991 which was subsequently amended on 13th February, 1992 and filed in the superior court on the following day and re-amended on 24th March, 1993 annexed to which was the requisite supporting affidavit…

…The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr. Gitobu Imanyara, Advocate who appeared for the Applicant. There are several annexures to the affidavit. I have perused them all.…

…The respondents are relying on two replying affidavits, one sworn by the Chairman of the First Respondent and the other by the returning officer, the Second Respondent.…

…He also relied on the affidavit of Joseph Muthusi and the documents annexed thereto.…

…The only disadvantage I can see on the part of the plaintiffs is that “Any action taken by Mr Mulei is always intended for his own benefit or of his henchmen” as deponed to by the first named plaintiff in the responding affidavit…

…The applicant has further deponed by his affidavit in support of the motion that he stands to suffer greatly because of the mistake of his advocate and so in the interest of justice the application ought to be allowed.…

…The applicant has further deponed by his affidavit in support of the motion that he stands to suffer greatly because of the mistake of his advocate and so in the interest of justice the application ought to be allowed.…