Search court decisions

…The cross-examination of the process server by Mr Otieno for the defendants did not show anything substantial from which this Court could conclude that the process server was lying.…

…But if the fact of service is denied, it is desirable that the process server should be put into the witness box and opportunity of cross-examination given to those who deny the service.”…

…The plaintiff categorically exculpated the 1st defendant when he said (in cross-examination by Mr Gikandi): “It is not true that I was employed by the 1st defendant as alleged in paragraph 5 of the plaint.…

…In cross-examination by Mr Pandya the 1st defendant admitted that the person who completed the first form was his own clerk who was paying wages to his employees, and that although he knew that the clerk had completed this…

…He said so in his evidence in chief and repeated it when the matter was raised in cross examination. The evidence of PW3 is very clear.…

…In his evidence in court the first accused Charles Ndolo who is appellant in HCCRA 52/03 said that he had a grudge with the complainant which he never put to the complainant in cross examination.…

…The issue of a grudge has been displaced by this court as being an after thought as it was not in cross examinations. Even if PW 1 had a grudge no explanation exists as to why PW 2 and 3 should frame the appellants.…

…In his evidence in chief he did not say he led the Police to the arrest of any of the Appellants but during cross-examination he said he had identified Accused One to the Police. He does not say where and how.…

…During cross-examination, he denied shouting that the deceased was a thief and repeated that the evidence of PW1 was false.…

…In the case giving rise to this appeal PW1 said during cross-examination:- “Deceased and accused are my customers” And during re-examination he said “Both deceased and accused were my friends.”…

…On cross examination he stated that the wires were naked before he rented the premises and that the child had to be standing in order to touch the wires. 7.…

…JMK) versus Kenya Power and Lightning Company Limited {2020} eKLR to state that a statement of defence was insucient to rebut the evidence of a plainti and such evidence was not rebutted unless eectively displaced in cross…

…During cross-examination, he denied shouting that the deceased was a thief and repeated that the evidence of PW1 was false.…

…In the case giving rise to this appeal PW1 said during cross-examination:- “Deceased and accused are my customers” And during re-examination he said “Both deceased and accused were my friends.”…

…During cross-examination, he denied shouting that the deceased was a thief and repeated that the evidence of PW1 was false.…

…In the case giving rise to this appeal PW1 said during cross-examination:- “Deceased and accused are my customers” And during re-examination he said “Both deceased and accused were my friends.”…

…The evidence of the ballistics expert as to his conclusions does not appear to have been seriously challenged in cross-examination.…

…As a recorded police statement, not made on oath, not subject to the test of cross examination, exhibit 122 could not take the place of sworn testimony.…

…deal with any merits of the case for that is a function solely reserved for the judge at the trial as the court itself is not usually fully informed as to deal with merits without discovery, without oral evidence tested by cross-examination…

…His evidence is more complicated by his answers under cross examination when he said: “The driver went out of the motor vehicle and joined the lady officer and I saw the driver give her something. I knew it was money.…

…He testified in hisevidence in cross examination that he does not know who was driving thedefendants motor vehicle but the owner is the defendant. He further testifiedthat defendants driver was prosecuted by police.…

…Then she made significant observations during her cross examination by the appellants to the 1st accused (1st appellant) she said.…

…In the cross examination of the respondent, it was suggested to her that she owned plot No 133R Ongata Rongai and not plot No 133B Ongata Rongai.…

…In the course of cross examination of the second appellant, she said that she did not know where plot No 133 B and or 133 R was nor who occupied them, thus conceding that plot No 133 B could belong to the respondent and could…

…The plaintiff was subjected to searching cross-examination by the learned counsel for the first defendant. He stated that he was looking at the road, the road was straight and it was on a clear night.…

…During cross-examination the applicant admitted during 1966 he was about 16 to 17 years old at Kiajuthu Secondary School and that he started working as a teacher (untrained) in Baringo District from 1970.…

…Cpl Joel Mutokaa (PW5) who arrested the appellant herein confirmed to the Court during cross-examination that the offences for which the appellant had initially arrested the complainant and others “were never investigated…

…brief is as follows:- PW1 the 1st plaintiff, PW5 a nephew of the 1st plaintiff and uncle to 2nd plaintiff and PW6 brother to 1st plaintiff and uncle to the 2nd plaintiff were firm both in their examination-in-chief and cross-examination…

…In cross-examination he stated:- “I have not cultivated plot No 243 or 1022 as I was not married, I was married in 1980. I have not cultivated it because the defendant refused.”…