amina athumani kauzeni vs maimuna ahmadi 2011 tzhc 2018 23 may 2011

The application was struck out because the applicant failed to cite the correct legal provision (section 14(1) of the Law of Limitation Act, Cap 89) for extension of time, rendering the application incompetent.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: amina athumani kauzeni vs maimuna ahmadi 2011 tzhc 2018 23 may 2011
Parties: Applicant: Amina Athumani Kauzeni; Respondent: Maimuna Ahmadi
Court: TZHC
Jurisdiction: Tanzania
Judgment Date: 23 May 2011
Procedural Posture: Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome: Application struck out
Legal Topics: Extension of Time, Certification of Point of Law, Proper Citation of Legal Provisions, Inherent Powers of the Court
Source Language: english

Civil Procedure Extension of Time Certification of Point of Law Proper Citation of Legal Provisions Inherent Powers of the Court

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 4 Party arguments 2

Parties

Amina Athumani Kauzeni

Applicant

Maimuna Ahmadi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicant properly moved the court by citing the correct legal provisions for extension of time
2 Whether sufficient reasons were advanced for the delay in filing the application

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application struck out

Orders

Application struck out for citing inapplicable provisions of law
No order as to costs

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 Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.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.