mwinge 1

I ( IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA MOROGORO SUB-REGISTRY AT IJC MOROGORO CIVIL REFERENCE N0.1991 OF 2024 (Arising from Taxation Cause No.19 of 2023 Originating from Land Appeal No.18 of 2022 Arising from Land Application No.67 of 2016) AHMED A, MWINGE.... l^APPLICANT GANO A. MWINGE 2^^ APPLICANT MPELWA A. MWINGE 3^^° APPLICANT ALLY A. MWINGE 4^" APPLICANT NEEMA A. MWINGE 5^" APPLICANT VERSUS HAROUN KHATIBU PANDE RESPONDENT RULING 07"^ May,2024 MANSOOR,3. This application Is made under Rule 7(1) and (2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015, GN.No.264 of 2015 and supported by an affidavit sworn by the advocate for the applicants, the learned Advocate, Hamis Athuman Mbangwa. From what can be gathered in their chamber application, the applicants are praying for the following orders; e lofS 1. That, may the Honourable Court be pleased to examine the decision of the Taxing Master dated 19^^ December,2023 in the Bill of Costs No.19 of 2023 before Hon. A. W. Mbando, Deputy Registrar to see legality and fairness of taxation 2. Costs of this application be provided for. 3. Any other reliefs(s) as this honourable Court may deem just to grant. In reply, the respondent opposed the application through the counter affidavit. With the leave of the Court, the hearing of the application was canvassed by way of written submission by the order of this Court dated 22^^ day of March,2024. Both parties complied with the scheduling order. Hamis Athuman Mbangwa the learned advocate entered appearance for the applicants while the respondent appeared personally unrepresented fending for his rights. Before diving on the merits of the the instant application and impassively scrutinising the competing submissions advanced by the parties in the light of the application, in my scanning of the instant application and the relevant laws made under, I came to realize that the present application Page 2 of 5 has been improperly filled in this court's registry for reasons to be disclosed soon hereunder. My starting point will be Order 7(1) and (2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order which provides as follows; 7. (2) A reference under order (1), shall be instituted by way of chamber summons supported by an affidavit and be filed witfiih 21 days offrom the date ofthe decision. Reverting back to the instant application, the impugned ruling subject of the present application was delivered on 17/12/2023. My perusal to the application reveals that the same was filed on 07/02/2024, 49 days after delivery of the ruling. Notably, after excluding two days (17/12/2023) when the ruling was delivered and 07/02/2024 when the applicants were lodging the application, they were already outside the prescribed time for 28 days.. That being the state of affairs I am satisfied that the instant application is hopelessly time bared and the applicants were supposed to file an application for extension of time before filing the present application.'My firm stance is buttressed by Order 8 (1) of the Advocate Remuneration Order,(supra) which provides that: Page 3 of 5 " The High Court may subject to order 7extend the time for fiiing a reference upon sufficient cause'.' Having found the application for reference was filed out of time, what is the consequence? Section 3(1)of Law of Limitation Act(Cap 89 R. E 2019) herein "the LLA" has an answer. The section provides thus: "Subject to the provisions of this Act, every proceeding described in the first column of the Schedule to this Act and which is instituted after the period of limitation prescribed therefore opposite thereto in the second column, shall be dismissed whether or not limitation has been set up as a defence. I am also fortified by the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Steven Masatu Wasira Vs. Joseph Sinde Warioba & AG,(1999)TLR 334 where it was stated that the High Court having held that the application was time barred had a power to dismiss it. Applying the same principle in this case, this court having deliberated that the reference was filed out of time the only remedy is to dismiss it and I so find. In view of the fore stated reasons I would hold as I hereby do that this reference was filed out of time. It is therefore dismissed with costs. It is so ordered. Page^of5 DATED AND DELIVERED AT MOROGORO THIS 07™ DAY OF MAY >024. c O )X^ e? ■y L. MANSOOR. z- X > -w m y JUDGE V // A■ 07.05.2024 Page 5 of 5