Augustino Kavishe scanned

Augustino Kavishe scanned

The applicant failed to account for the delay from 2017 to 2024 and provided an affidavit tainted with untruths regarding knowledge of the impugned judgment. The alleged illegality is not apparent on the face of the record and would require examination of evidence. The delay is inordinate and not justified. Therefore, no sufficient cause has been demonstrated for extension of time.

Citation
Augustino Kavishe scanned
Parties
Applicant: Augustino Athuman Kavishe; 1st Respondent: William M. Gideme; 2nd Respondent: Joseph Manyanda; 3rd Respondent: Hamisi Mrisho Kidogolini; 4th Respondent: Mapunda Damian; 5th Respondent: Maganga A. Maganga
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
31 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Revision Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Revision, Locus Standi, Illegality as Ground for Extension, Abuse of Court Process
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Extension of Time Revision Locus Standi Illegality as Ground for Extension Abuse of Court Process

Case Brief

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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Augustino Athuman Kavishe

Applicant

William M. Gideme

1st Respondent

Joseph Manyanda

2nd Respondent

Hamisi Mrisho Kidogolini

3rd Respondent

Mapunda Damian

4th Respondent

Maganga A. Maganga

5th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Revision Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to apply for revision of the District Land and Housing Tribunal judgment
  2. 2 Whether alleged illegality on the face of the record constitutes sufficient ground for extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to account for the delay from 2017 to 2024 and provided an affidavit tainted with untruths regarding knowledge of the impugned judgment. The alleged illegality is not apparent on the face of the record and would require examination of evidence. The delay is inordinate and not justified. Therefore, no sufficient cause has been demonstrated for extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for extension of time is dismissed in its entirety