RULING
The power of this Court to extend time within which to perform any act provided for in the Court of Appeal Rules follows a well beaten path, set out extensively in various judicial pronouncements. There is no confusion, uncertainty or obscurity as the path and procedure to be followed as the same is well known to both advocates and judicial officers. Often times, parties and their advocates use different paths to achieve the simple goal of persuading the court to exercise its discretion in their favour. However, the Court is guided by the length of the delay, a disclosure of reasonable explanation for the delay, the conduct of the parties and the nature of the dispute.
It suffices to restate some of the landmark decisions on this point. In Fakir Mohammed v. Joseph Mugambi and 2 Others
[2005] eKLR (Civil Application No. Nai 332 of 2004) it was put thus:
“The exercise of this Court’s discretion under Rule 4 has [follows] a well-beaten path ... there is no limit to the number of facto…