ahaco oil limited another vs apel petroleum limited 2016 tzhccomd 2 11 march 2016

Applicants demonstrated an arguable defense by admitting partial repayment and raising discrepancies in the loan amount, thus satisfying the conditions for leave to defend under Order 35 Rule 3 CPC.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: ahaco oil limited another vs apel petroleum limited 2016 tzhccomd 2 11 march 2016
Parties: Applicant: Ahaco Oil Limited; Applicant: Hadija Abdul Faraji; Respondent: Apel Petroleum Limited
Court: TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction: Tanzania
Judgment Date: 11 March 2016
Procedural Posture: Miscellaneous Commercial Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Defend Summary Suit
Outcome: Application allowed
Legal Topics: Summary Procedure, Leave to Defend, Negotiable Instruments, Loan Disputes
Source Language: english

Civil Procedure Commercial Law Summary Procedure Leave to Defend Negotiable Instruments Loan Disputes

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Ahaco Oil Limited

Applicant

Hadija Abdul Faraji

Applicant

Apel Petroleum Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Commercial Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Defend Summary Suit

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated a prima facie defense entitling them to leave to defend the summary suit under Order 35 of the Civil Procedure Code

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants demonstrated an arguable defense by admitting partial repayment and raising discrepancies in the loan amount, thus satisfying the conditions for leave to defend under Order 35 Rule 3 CPC.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

Leave granted to all applicants to defend the summary suit
Costs to follow the cause in the main suit

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.