abdallah k mgonja another vs permanent secretary ministry of works others 2003 tzhc 73 18 march 2003

IN ‘illE HlGil OOUET Oi? ^ jjS SAL^'iM M I X . CIVIL CAUSE NO. 63 OT 2002 AEDALLAH IC. MGONJA APPLICANTS 2 . ROBINSON MONYO ) V ersus 1 . THE H^lfiNKNT SECRETARY MINI; -TKY ) * OF WORKS ) 2 . THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL ) 3 . THE NATIONAL TRANSPORT COt-lPANY ) . . RESPONDENTS (IN RECEIVERSIilP) ) if. THE PRESIDENTIAL PARASTA1AL SECTOR REFORM COMMISSION (PSRC) ) R U E I_.il. £ fteraa_«_ J.« In J5ieicellanso«.e C i v i l Cause No. 6 3 /2 0 0 2 th e a p p lic a n t s , A b d allah K . Mgonja and Robinson, I onyo through th e l e g a l s e r v ic e s o f M ,J. LUGAZIYA, Advocate o f Bar os Salaam law Chambers, lod ged A -chamber sttninms se e k in g fo r th e fo llo w in g o rd e rs : ( i) g ra n t o f le a v e to f i l e an a p p lic a tio n fo r p r e r o g a tiv e o rd ers a g a in s t th e Permanent S e c r e t a r y , M in is tr y o f Works and th e P r e s id e n t ia l P a ro e ts tta l s e c t o r Be Torn Commission (P#S.R .'“'» ) , f i r s t and ^t-th re sp o n d e n ts. C ii) o o e ts and : a y o th e r r e l i e f s deemed a p p ro p ria te * The a p p lic a t io n f i l e d troclar s e c t io n 2 ( 2 ) o f the J u d ic a tu re A p p lic a tio n o f Lews O rdinance, S e c tio n 17 ( 2 ) o f th e Law Reform ( F a t a l A ccid en ts) and M isce lla n e o u s P r o v is io n s Ordinance Cap 360 a s amended by A ct No. 55 o f 1968, s e c tio n 1? o f A ct No. 27/ 9 % . Order XXXVII iiu le s 1 and 2 and s e c t io n 95 o f the C i v i l Procedure Code 1966 i s rccom pcnied by the jo in t a f f i d a v i t o f th e a p p lic a n t 2 I t i s depended by the a p p lic. n ts th a t th ey a re the la w fu l ten a n ts o f houses on P lo t No. 35 THE E sta te Kijitonyam a and P lo t No. 83 A D rive Inn Area the p ro p e rty o f the N ational tra n sp o rt Company, the 3rd Respondents and th a t th e y have been n o t if ie d th a t th e prem ises have re v e rte d to the 1 s t respondent w hile t h e i r tenancy agreem ents s u b s is t s . 'That fo llo w in g t h is move th e a p p lic a n ts are apprehensive th a t t h e ir r ig h t s under the tenancy agreements w i l l be compromised, hence t h e ir a p p lic a tio n seekin g ord ers o f p r o h ib itio n , c e r t i o r a r i and mandamus a g a in s t the f i r s t and ^th respondents r e s p e c t iv e ly . On 10th A p r il 2002 I granted le r v e to the p a r t ie s t o argue the a p p lic a tio n through w r itte n subm issions and a schedule to th a t e f f e c t was agreed t o . R uling v®s to be d e liv e r e d on 03/07/2002. As n e ith e r the a p p lic a n ts nor the respondents complied w ith the order o f the court :o f i l e the w r itte n subm issions, the co u rt on 03/7/2002 dism issed the a p p lic a tio n fo r la c k o f p ro s e c u tio n . On r e c e ip t o f the d is m is s a l order o f 3rd J u ly 2002 the a p p lic a n ts have f i l e d a chamber summons under s e c tio n 95 and Order IX Rule 13 f o r ord ers th a t the d is m is s a l order bo s e t a s id e and tim e be extended fo r f i l i n g o f w ritte n subm issions. In the a f f i d a v i t in support o f the chamber a p p lic a tio n Mr, Mutabaazi J u liu s Lugaaiya has deponed th a t !ih is s ic k r e l a t i v e who e v e n tu a lly passed away an 23rd June 2002:: prevented him from complying w ith th e order o f f i l i n g the w ritte n su bm ission s. Furthermore th e a p p lic a tio n under referen ce, co n ta in s m atters o f g re a t p u b lic im portance a s such the in t e r e s t s c i' ; : t ic e re q u ire th a t i t be disposed on m erit* In r e p ly the respondents a ve r th a t the reasons fo r non com pliance w ith the order o f 10.A/2002 are n e ith e r s u f f i c i e n t nor j u s t i f i a b l e to warrant the r a tt in g a sid e o f the r e s p e c tiv e o rd er. C a r e fu l co n sid e ra tio n o f the arguments fo r and a g a in s t th e a p p lic a tio n fo r s e t t in g a s id e the d ism issa l order and r e s to r a tio n o f the main a p p lic a tio n c l e a r l y shows, la c k o f s u f f i c i e n t and ju s t i f i a b l e cause/reason a s req u ired by la w . •> **/5 3 I t npy be tr u e th a t th e learn ed advocate was a tte n d in g a s i c k r e l a t i v e who e v e n tu a lly passed away on 23rd June 2002, hut the record c l e a r l y in d ic a te s th a t the a p p lic a n t was ordered to f i l e h is subm ission in c h ie f and the r e jo in d e r on 16/5/2002 and 5/6/2002 r e s p e c t iv e l y . There i s e v ery reason to opine th a t the a p p l i c a n t s advocate had ample tim e to ta k e care o f h is s i c k r e l a t i v e a s w e ll a s f i l e the w r itte n subm issions in com pliance w ith the order o f the c o u r t. In the circu m stan ces I am s a t i s f i e d th a t th e a p p lic a tio n b efo re me has f a i l e d to s a t i s f y th e requirem ents o f Order IX Rule 13 ( 1 ) fo r la c k o f s u f f i c i e n t cause and I d is m is s i t w ith c o s t s . Order a c c o r d in g ly . S , Hie ma JUDGE Court., R u lin g d e liv e r e d befor,e Mr, Kamba and Mr« L ugaziya learn ed a d v o ca tes fo r th e p a r t i e s t h i s 18/3/2003. S . Xheiaa JUDGE 18/3/^003