ANNA KUDILILWA MALI vs MARIA KAHOLWE

THE JUDICIARY OF TANZANIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA AT SHINYANGA MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 000021011 OF 2026 ANNA KUDILILWA MALI .............................. COMPLAINANT / APPELLANT / APPLICANT / PLAINTIFF VERSUS MARIA KAHOLWE .............................. RESPONDENT / DEFENDANT RULING MASSAM, J The applicant, moved this court by way of chamber summons under section 14 of the Law of Limitation Act Cap 89 RE 2023 and Rule 3(4) of the Magistrates’ courts (Limitation of proceedings under Customary Law) GN No. 311 of 1964. The applicant prayed for an extension of time within which to file a Memorandum of Appeal against the ruling and drawn order of the District Court of Shinyanga in Civil Review Reference No. 202507091000016446, dated 2nd October 2025. The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr. Frank Samwel the advocate for the applicant while the respondent opted not to file the counter affidavit. Page. 1 During the hearing of this application, the Applicant was represented by Mr. Frank Samwel, learned Advocate, while the Respondent was represented by Mr. Pharles Malengo, learned Advocate. The application was heard orally. In support of his application. Frank Samwel, submitted that he brought this application for extension of time and he prayed that the same be granted. On the side of the respondent who represented by Mr. Pharles Malengo informed this court that he is not opposing the applicant application and prayed the same to be granted. In rejoinder, Mr. Frank Samwel contented that, since his learned friend did not oppose the application, he prayed to be granted seven (7) days within which to file the intended appeal. He further prayed the same be granted without costs. Having considered the application and submission made by the learned counsel for both parties, it is apparent that the application is not opposed by the respondent, as the respondent has expressly conceded to the prayer for extension of time. Although the fact that an application is unopposed does not, by itself, automatically entitle an applicant to the relief sought as it is trite law that extension of time is a discretionary remedy, which may only be granted upon good cause being shown. As stated in Tanga Cement Company Limited vs. Masanga and Amos A. Mwalwanda, Civil Application No. 6 of 2001. "What amounts to sufficient cause has not been defined. From decided cases, a number of factors must be considered, including whether the application has been brought promptly, the absence of a valid explanation for the delay, and diligence on the part of the applicant." Page. 2 In the present case, the applicant has demonstrated sufficient grounds for the extension of time, as set out in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the affidavit sworn by his advocate which stated that he filed his appeal within the prescribed period. However, it was subsequently discovered by the court that the drawn order of the District Court was incomplete. Consequently, the applicant’s counsel sought leave to withdraw the appeal with liberty to refile it after the necessary correction had been made, within fourteen (14) days. The applicant’s counsel thereafter applied for the correction of the drawn order. However, the corrected order was furnished after the expiry of the period granted for refiling the appeal hence this application. From the foregoing facts, it is undisputed that the applicant took prompt steps to pursue his appeal and that there was no deliberate or unexplained delay on his part. The applicant has demonstrated diligence in prosecuting the matter. Having considered the circumstances of this application I am satisfied that the applicant has established sufficient cause for grant the extension of time. See the case of Benedicto Mumello vs Bank of Tanzania, Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2002 [2006] TZCA 12. Accordingly, the application is hereby granted. The applicant is granted an extension of seven (7) days within which to file the intended appeal. I make no order as to costs. It is so ordered. Dated at SHINYANGA this 9th of September 2026 . Page. 3 R. B MASSAM JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT Page. 4