Wakilii

Kisumu Motor Works v Manji (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1940)

East African Court of Appeal · [1940] EACA 31 · 1940 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from judgment of Resident Magistrate, Kisumu
Decision
Appeal dismissed on preliminary objection; leave granted to re-file

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

A certified copy of a decree or order accompanying a memorandum of appeal under Order XXXIX Rule 1 must be certified by the officer who normally has custody of the original court documents. Certification by a subordinate officer acting during the temporary absence of the proper officer, without legal authority for such delegation, does not satisfy the procedural requirement. The appeal was dismissed on this preliminary objection, with leave granted to file a fresh appeal within one month.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on preliminary objection; leave granted to re-file

Facts

The appellant appealed from a judgment of the Resident Magistrate at Kisumu. The Resident Magistrate, who normally has custody of court documents, was temporarily absent when the appellant's advocate applied for a certified copy of the judgment on the last day allowed for filing an appeal. A district officer holding a subordinate court of the second class certified the copy in the Resident Magistrate's absence. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the certified copy was not properly certified by the officer with normal custody of the documents.

Issues

  1. Whether a certified copy of a judgment accompanying a memorandum of appeal must be certified by the officer who normally has custody of the court documents, or whether certification by a subordinate officer acting in the absence of the proper officer is sufficient.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Leave granted to file fresh appeal within one month.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Certification of Judgments — Proper Officer
A certified copy of a decree or order that must accompany a memorandum of appeal under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules must be certified by the officer who normally has custody of the original court documents, as required by section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Certification — Delegation of Authority
Where the proper officer with custody of court documents is temporarily absent, certification by a subordinate officer acting in that officer's place, without legal sanction for such delegation, does not constitute proper certification for purposes of filing an appeal.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Extension of Time — Proper Remedy
Where an appellant cannot obtain a properly certified copy of a judgment within the time allowed for filing an appeal due to the absence of the proper certifying officer, the appropriate remedy is to apply for an extension of time rather than to accept certification by an unauthorized officer.

Legislation cited (3)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Kisumu Motor Works v Manji (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1940) [1940] EACA 31 (1 January 1940)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.