Case ID:181882

Jitash Doongarsi Jamnadas t/a Bhatia Radio House v Ahmed Jaffer [2021] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Tribunal Case 150 of 2018 (Mombasa)

Parties:

Jitash Doongarsi Jamnadas t/a Bhatia Radio House v Ahmed Jaffer

Date Delivered:

17 Sep 2021

Case Class:

Civil

Court:

Business Premises Rent Tribunal

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Hon. Cyprian Mugambi Nguthari - Chairman

Citation:

Jitash Doongarsi Jamnadas t/a Bhatia Radio House v Ahmed Jaffer [2021] eKLR

Court Division:

Tribunal

County:

Mombasa

Disclaimer:

The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

BUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNAL

VIEW PARK TOWERS 7

TH

& 8

TH

FLOOR

TRIBUNAL CASE NO. 150 OF 2018 (MOMBASA)

JITASH DOONGARSI JAMNADAS T/A

BHATIA RADIO HOUSE...................................TENANT

VERSUS

AHMED JAFFER........................................LANDLORD

RULING

1. The Landlord’s application dated

27

th

November 2019

seeks the following orders;

a. Spent

b. That there be a stay of the orders made on

20

th

November 2019

pending the hearing and determination of this application

inter partes.

c. That the orders made on

20

th

November 2019

be set aside and the Landlord’s application dated

9

th

October 2019

be reinstated for hearing and determination on merits.

d. Costs.

2. The grounds upon which the application is brought and the affidavit in support thereof may be summarized as follows;

a. That on

20

th

November 2019

, the Applicant’s application

dated 9

th

October 2019

was dismissed for want of prosecution.

b. That on the material day, counsel for the Landlord, Mr Mutisya was sick.

c. That Mr Mutisya had instructed Mr E.K. Mutua to proceed with the matter on his behalf but Mr Mutua was held in a traffic jam and by the time he arrived in court, the matter had already been called out and dismissed.

d. That the above is a mistake of counsel.

e. That the Landlord stands to suffer substantial and irreparable loss.

3. The Tenant, as far as I can peruse the court records has not filed any replies to the Landlord’s application dated

27

th

November

neither has the Tenant filed any submissions in opposition to the said application.

4. On

12

th

November 2018,

the Tribunal issued injunctive orders against the Landlord pending the hearing of the case, the Landlord was also compelled to accept rent at a set rate of

Kshs 10,000/-

per month pending the hearing and determination of the case and the Tenant ordered to pay the Tenant the costs assessed at

Kshs 25,000/-.

The Landlord was absent on the date that these orders were issued.

5. It is the above orders which the Landlord sought to set aside by his application dated

9

th

October 2019

and which application was dismissed on

20

th

November 2019.

6. The instant application now seeks a setting aside of the orders issued on

20

th

November 2019

and a reinstatement of the application

dated 9

th

October 2019

for hearing.

7. The reasons given for the absence of counsel for the Landlord have been set out in the affidavit of Stephen M. Mutisya Advocate.

8. Mr Mutisya has stated that he was sick on the material day and therefore instructed Mr E.K. Mutua to hold his brief and proceed with the matter.

9. Mr Mutua, it has been stated, did not make it to court due to a traffic jam. The Applicant has not provided any evidence that his counsel was unwell on the material day neither has Mr E.K. Mutua advocate sworn any affidavit to confirm that indeed he had instructions in the matter, that he was ready to proceed and that his non-appearance in court was due to a traffic jam.

10. These matters though have not been contested by the Tenant/Respondent and in the wider interests of justice, I am willing to believe the facts as set out in the affidavit of the Landlord’s counsel.

11. I will in the premises make the following orders;

a. That the orders made by the Tribunal on

20

th

November 2019

be and are hereby set aside.

b. That the Landlord’s application dated

9

th

October 2019

be fixed for hearing on a priority basis.

c. The orders issued by the Tribunal on

18

th

October 2018

to remain in force, pending the hearing and determination of the Landlord’s application dated

9

th

October, 2019.

d. Costs in the cause.

HON. CYPRIAN MUGAMBI NGUTHARI

CHAIRMAN

BUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNAL

Ruling dated, signed and delivered by

Hon Cyprian Mugambi Nguthari

this

17

th

day of

September, 2021

in the presence of

Mr Mutisya

for the

Landlord

and in the absence of the

Counsel

for the

Tenant.

HON. CYPRIAN MUGAMBI NGUTHARI

CHAIRMAN

BUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNAL