CHARLES KAMUREN
V.
GRACE JELAGAT KIPCHOIM & 2 OTHERS

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

This appeal arises from a ruling delivered by Achode, J. on the 17^th day of June, 2013. In the said ruling the court determined four applications that had, by consent, been consolidated and heard together. The applications were as follows:

Application dated 10^th May, 2013 filed by the 1^st respondent seeking an order to strike out the petition for late service.

Application dated 14^th May, 2013 filed by the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents to strike out the petition for non-compliance with rule 10 (1) (c) and (d) of the Elections (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition Rules, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Petition Rules”).

Application dated 21^st May, 2013 filed by the petitioner seeking extension of time to effect service of the petition.

Application dated 14^th May, 2013 by the petitioner seeking leave to amend the petition.

In respect of the first application, the 1^st respondent argued that the petitioner failed to serve the petition within the stipulated period of…