RULING
This is an appeal against the order of the High Court sitting at Nyeri (O’Kubasu J) in objection proceedings made under order XXI of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Mr Lee Muthoga who acted for the respondent in the High Court, also appearing before us, has raised a preliminary objection to say that the appeal is incompetent for at least the following four reasons:
1. Notice of appeal was not served upon the respondent as required by rule 76(1); consequently,
2. The respondent was unable to comply with the mandatory provisions of rule 78(1)(a) which requires that every person on whom a notice of appeal is served shall within fourteen days after service on him of the notice of appeal lodge in the appropriate registry and serve on the intended appellant notice of a full and sufficient address for service. The respondent therefore was prevented from protecting his rights in the appeal, said Mr Muthoga.
3. The objection proceedings in the High Court being under order XXI rule 53 et seq, the …