A Makindu court has ordered Chania Genesis company to compensate a passenger Ksh 223,000, who was injured after the bus she was travelling in involved in an accident that left her sustaining injuries.
while delivering the judgement, Makindu senior principal magistrate Yusuf Shikanda ordered Chania Genesis company to compensate Alice Wakio Mwangeka for the injuries she sustained on the time of the accident that occurred at Keneni along Mombasa Road at Mtito Andei on November 23, 2015.
He stated that, “I hold that the plaintiff has proven his case on a balance of probabilities as against the defendants. Consequently, I enter judgment against the defendants jointly.”
He proceeded to order the victim to be compensated general damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenities to Ksh 220,000 and special damages of Ksh 3,000.
The plaintiff was also awarded interest on the damages as well as costs of the suit.
In determining the suit, the magistrate considered the evidence produced solely by the plaintiff which was not disputed at all since the respondents never appeared in court to defend themselves.
On the material day, the plaintiff alleged that she was travelling from Mombasa to Nairobi on a bus from Chania Genesis company registration number KBV 250A , driven by Samuel Mugundu Karue.
She claimed that the vehicle was negligently, recklessly carelessly driven before it rammed into an oncoming vehicle while trying to overtake.
She sustained serious injuries, loss and pain, for which she holds the defendants liable. She sued the driver of the bus, owner Joel Mwaura Nduruhu and the company operating the bus at the time.
The plaintiff pleaded with the court pointing out particulars of negligence against the driver of the said bus.
The defendants entered appearance on October 16, 2019 and filed a joint statement of defence on the same day, in which they denied the plaintiff’s claim in total.u
The defendants denied that Karue was the driver of the ill fated bus and also disputed the owner and the company.
They also denied that the plaintiff was a lawful fare-paying passenger in the accident motor vehicle, and denied that the accident occurred on November 23, 2015 involving the suit motor vehicle.
The defendants contended that the plaintiff did not disclose a reasonable cause of action against them and prayed that the plaintiff’s suit be dismissed with costs.
The defendants did not attend court nor call any witness to testify in support of their defence despite being given more than sufficient time to file their submissions they failed to do so.
In determination, the magistrate indicated that, ” I have carefully considered the evidence on record and given due regard to submissions made by the plaintiff as well as the applicable law.
He also noted that in any event, the plaintiff’s evidence was not controverted by the defence hence entering the judgement in favor of the plaintiff against defendants.
