WebOn 3rd August 1990 a new counsel for the appellant, namely A G N Kamau, advocate, came into the scene and filed an application by Chamber Summons dated 4th July 1990 … WebThat decision merely followed Hirani v Kassam [1952] 19 EACA 131. The affidavits in this case, ordered by the previous court, illustrate the futility of attempting to arbitrate at this stage between the rival claims. The parties are therefore left to their well-known remedies, and the appeal must fail.

Hirani v Hirani [1982] EWCA Civ 1 (05 May 1982

WebIt was set out by Windham J, as he then was, and approved by the Court of Appeal for East Africa, in Hirani v Kassam (1952) 19 EACA 131, at 134, as follows: “The mode of paying … WebOct 15, 2015 · It was held in Hirani V Kassam (1952) 19 EACA 131 that:- ... The plaint in HCCS 015/2013 Brian Asiimwe V Margret Tumwine Tumushabe, however shows that the plaintiff’s (respondent in this case) claim against the defendant (1 st applicant in this case) was for, among other things, an order for the revocation/cancellation of a grant of letters ... hendricks county government building

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH …

Web10 citing the case of Hirani v. Kassam 1952 E.A at 131 where the Court of Appeal held that; “A consent judgment cannot be varied or discharged unless obtained by fraud, collusion, … WebFlora Wasike v Destimo Wamboko Civil Appeal No 81 of 84; (1982-88) 1 KAR 625 2. Brooke Bond Liebig Ltd v Mallya [1975] EA 266 3. Hirani v Kassam (1952) 19 EACA 131 Statutes. End of preview. Want to read the entire page? Upload your study docs or become a. Course Hero member to access this document. WebFurther, the defendants argued, relying on Flora Wasike (supra) and Hirani V Kassam [1952] 19 ECA 131 page 137 that: “The mode of paying the debt then, is part of the consent judgment. That being so, the court cannot interfere with it except in such circumstances as would afford good ground for varying or rescinding a contract between the parties.” hendricks county government pay