19940630 TZHC Dar es Salaam 1

MISCELLi.IJOUS crvi:.. CAUSE NO. 40 OF 1993 AS.IT.A llOIIl!l{ED lvLAl."iYOPO • • .... • ...... , • .......... • •• • • • •• • u AP~IOAN'l' Vil:Z:4u8 MOD:Af.IED UA11iISI lvlA.:IYOPO • •••• • ••• •. •'• •• • • • • •• • •••• • • ••• • RESPONDl!lf'l' ·\ RULING MACKANJA. 2 J • s fhi• is an applio~tion for e::.:·~~1tion of J11:ime ~itb:in wh1.oh to file an appeal against th~ 'judgmont -0£ the District Magistrate of Kinondoni . D:i.strict Cor:.rt in Mt~oell aneot.ts O~vil .appeal lfo.189 Of 1 m. 'Rhese proceedings wer-0 m~titu:'ved by a Chamber &.tri1.mons whioh is 11,1pported. by the unverified. affidavit of Asha tt,ohallled lillll;;ropo, the applicant. _1rol1ame,t. Manyopo, -'.;he ResP,ondlJi\t, has raised a prelimiua17 objection in paragraph 2 of his coun,ter e.ff id.avit ill wl.ich he ol:.allenges the Validity of tile unverified affidavit of the appU,cant, c )nt~1d.ing that it is illou.ra1'ly defective, Neither -'i;.i.1.e applicant no.r ho;: advocate has said. anytllmg in -defence of that affidavit. I am .oUl'e .t::i-~hing' has bac.m said in. tha.t behalf bec&ise the d.et'6Jts are owioi...:;; e.1.~ ..,....;J ~;>noaquer;aes t"Wt not far to fetch. l woul,1 -;horefor3 asree wL> :.::::. Mlti.1a., learned counsel for t:1e 'l'espondent, that tho co,,;.rt will no·~ i.10"11 011 s:.ioh an mvcJ.id document. I woilld have diamissad tl-i.o applic 'l/liion were it not t.011 a supplementary aif id.av.it w:..:.iol~ is in placa. In his affidavit wllioh wu filed to su;J. ,\,.. ont tl1~efeoti,~ affidavit of the applicant, ILrahim HollaraeJ. wt·, sweax·e-.!.;~ the ) a,pplioant is his mother, avero i.hat he in ,wll ~cnvereaut with ~he conduc·t of his mother• s case. I!e bas swol:111 -~:::.: ; . ..1is moth~r engaged one Iiir. Kaga.mbo, an advoc.,d;o, to lodge an appeti.1 ,aga.inst the decision of the District Court which she desires to oonte:..;;: if t:1is application J .. 2 - granted. That in responne -~he s~.id l.:Xo Kag&,mbo lodged a notice of • his fatention to a.ppec11. bJ a letJcs;;;, :r::.ic:·. -~:..0 cieponent persona.l.l.y delivered to the trial 0 .. :.i.xt. .S:e CQ!::.-~0nds. ·0:1c:i; a copy of that let·ter J.S axine:,:ed to his af:'.:ichvit and markeC::. "A" o ifo conte.,.-id.s further that a. receipt, which was :' s;.1ued to llim for copies of judgillent and proceed.mg• is at"'liaohed to his aL.'id,.;v::.t and marked "D". The ·affidavit of Ibxall:im li.ohamed wr.ic2 is ::.:·i::.ed :in the rjco:;:,d of this application d()es not· have -'chose annextL:rc3. 'l1b.e depon~1t, :i.i:l p~etJraph 7, narrates his coirunwiication wiJlih "iih-.: said Lr. Kc.gwnbo a:,.1d how cm 9th A..Pril, 1993 the la"1;-ter told b.im that tl1•= appeal 11ad been 1 odgcd and thaJli it was being handled by the honourable the frincipa.l Ju<4Je.. He was surp.-ised to learn soon thereaftE:r that his motlier 'l-ras su.mmoned by the learned trial Ilistrict l\Iagistrate who informed her Jc:.12:I; the decree was to be executed because her failure to appeal meant -~hat she b.ad been. satisfied ~-~;_ with the judglllent. Ile also contends that the said I,tt. Kagambo became indif'f'erent when he ·was asked whether -the appecl1 had been lo~ed. The deponent learnt sooner that none had -been lodged when he paid a visit to ·t:.1e Civil Registry of tl1if:"! OoLu-·ii• In his quest for his mother's rights he w:e:c.. t -~o :::1·otest t.:; the llonol.l.l'able the Principal Judge, only to tie directed to the· Aegi;:/cre..r bc.::oTe whom he alleges Mr. Ii:a.ga;11bo gave false reasoris regardi.11,1 the delay in lodging the a.PPeal. ,,.,, lrlohaliied. Mar.yo-to has dispu·!ied all t112 contGnJi.ions in Ibrahim Mohamed's affidavit. _In particular, he oo:..1te,1ds ti1a·~ the jud.(Jaent Was delivered brefore bo·~h litigant$ on i2tll OcJcober, 1992 and that the applicant took no steps to cl'lalleng·c H. And Er. hh:i.na., advooa,tUli for the respondent., has sub.ilitted that Ibrab.:i.m lfonawed' s affidavit raises only one c_rucial issue, and that fo wllo·ther. the negligence _of- an advocate is sufficient ground for allo~n1g this application. In uw view t!1e answ~ is in the negative; an a.dvoca·te is instructed to act dili8ent1Y, and if he fails to do so his client ma.v institute civil proceedings for damages. The negl. igencc oi ax:. advocate will riot therefore amount to a sufficient caLsc l'or · ~--O purpose of section 14(1) of the La.w of ~imitatio11 Act, No.10 o:c 1::'71, which gives discretion to the 001.1.rtc to e~tenci the po~ioc. ct 1i.1,1itation for institution of appoals 01· applica•~im;,s o-t11t;::· ~--....a for ti.1e e:-i-:eo'1tion of a. decree. If, ae Mr. Sc.i,gala-v.c Sllhroits, L:i:~ I(aJambo did not handle ; ••••• 3 1. • - 3 enlargement of time ·v:i-tL_: -,.,:::_:::::.i to a;:~0?.l -oc:J:,~;.:;;, ~c:.12t 1r.Ould amount to negl ~e.-iee in resp2d of ~1hicl:. -~::.c c:.~;,l ioant ma;:: ::.:1stit\lte Pt'.Q04~P for recover;,; of damagcsG Finally, l do thil?-k_ tha/i; -what is a-'.;-tribu.tod to ~. Kag$Jllbo~ · that is whether he made false sta.t'2::uents before t:1e Registrar or no"t, is an ext:i;enuo:~ mattor to this application. In any case this oourt will no"li condemn him Lmllea:.:'d. The application is doomed to :fail and it i~ dismissed with costs. Delivered. Mr, Na.ssoroJi'..(r. Se111~aluwc: I''o;- ,t.;)plic.:int iu-. Nassoro (A.d.vo9ate)/ Mr. Mhina (Mvooate) : F'pr .despontl01r~