ABEED MINAZALI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE DISTRICT REGISTRY OF MWANZA AT MWANZA MSC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4558 OF 2024 (Arising from Taxation Cause No. 30 of2023) ABEED MINAZALI MANJI (Administrator of the Estate of Nadir Minazali Manji)....... APPLICANT VERSUS THE REGISTERED TRUSTEE OF MABINTI KIPALAPALA TABORA............................................... RESPONDENT RULING Dated 06/05/2024 Before: Hon. A. Matuma, J. In this application the Applicant is seeking extension of time within which to file a Reference proceedings against the decision of taxation cause No. 30 of 2023 (Hon. C.M Tengwa DR) dated 20th November, 2023. At the hearing of this application, Mr. Daniel Malugu learned advocate represented the applicant while Dr. George Mwaisondola Learned advocate represented the Respondent. The applicant's advocate in his submission stated that the taxing master having heard the partis for and against the taxation scheduled the matter for ruling on 15.09.2023 but on such date the taxing master was out of station and the matter was adjourned withouta^fixed date. The parties were told that they will been notified but no any notification was issued to the applicant until on 20th February, 2024 when he was served with a demand letter to pay Tshs. 6,475,000/= as the amount taxed. That on their perusal of the court records, they noted that the ruling was delivered on 20.11.2023 in the absence the parties. Mr. Daniel Malugu learned advocate further argued that the delivery of such ruling without their notification was prejudicial to the applicant because it denied him the right to make reference within time to challenge the decision. He made several citations which I seen no need to dwell with. On his part Dr. George Mwaisondola for the Respondent, he stood firm apposing this application on the ground that the delay is inordinate and the applicant shows lack of diligence and sloppiness. He argued that both parties were notified on the date for delivery of the ruling even if they also defaulted appearance on that date. He also cited an authority in regard to the factors to be considered is the application of this nature. Having heard the parties for and against this application, it is a noted fact that the parties are not in dispute that after the hearing of the matter, the taxing master fixed it for ruling on 15.09.2023 but onsuch date no ruling 2 was delivered and no subsequent date was scheduled until when the ruling was finally delivered on the 20.11.2023 in the absence of both parties. Dr. George in both his affidavit and the oral submission contends that the parties were notified by phone to appear on such date for ruling even if he himself did not appear. In my thorough consideration I find that since this court did not make a formal adjournment in which a fixed date could have been pronounced to the parties, the reserved ruling could have not been delivered until the parties are formally summoned and the court records speaks loud to that effect. In the instant matter I cannot agree with Dr. George Mwaisondola to the effect that the parties were summoned by a phone call. Had it been the case, the court record could have been speaking so and an affidavit of the relevant court clerk who phoned the parties could have been sought and obtained to establish the fact and tell what was the response of such alleged phone call to each party. In the absence of court record and an affidavit of the court clerk who is alleged to have summoned the parties through a phone call, the averments of Dr. George remain hearsays as rightly submitted by Mr.Daniel Malugu. 3 In the circumstances, I find that the applicant was not aware of the date for delivery of the ruling and the lack of such notification is a good cause for the whole period of the delay until when they were ambushed with a demand letter and later their perusal of court records. I therefore allow this application and grant the applicant twenty-one (21) days from today within which to lodge the requisite Reference. In the circumstance of the matter, I order no costs to either party. It is so ordered. A.Matuma JUDGE 06.05.2024 Court: Ruling delivered in the presence of Mr. Daniel Malugu Learned advocate for the applicant and in the presence of Dr. George Mwaisondola learned advocate for the Respondent. - JUDGE 06.05.2024 4