Hajji Ibrahim Kissule v William Lumu and Another (Civil Suit No. 84 of 2022)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The High Court Land Division ruled that a civil suit abates where the plaintiff fails to file summons for directions within 28 days from the date of the last reply or rejoinder as required by Order XIA rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Amendment Rules 2019. The suit was dismissed after one year and three months had elapsed without compliance.
Outcome
Suit abated for non-compliance with procedural requirements
Facts
The plaintiff filed a civil suit against two defendants on 26 January 2022. The plaintiff took out summons to file a defence which were endorsed. The second defendant filed her written statement of defence on 30 January 2022 and the rejoinder was filed on 18 May 2022. One year and three months elapsed from the date of the last reply without the plaintiff filing summons for directions as required by the Civil Procedure Amendment Rules 2019.
Issues
- Whether the suit should abate for failure to file summons for directions within the prescribed time limit.
Orders
- Suit abates in accordance with Order XIA rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Amendment Rules 2019.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
- Civil Procedure Amendment Rules 2019 Order XIA rule 1(2)
- Civil Procedure Amendment Rules 2019 Order VIII rule 18(5)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.