ayman m alkharaf vs aymanouf safaris limited and one another 2021 tzhccomd 3485 12 december 2021

ayman m alkharaf vs aymanouf safaris limited and one another 2021 tzhccomd 3485 12 december 2021

The application was struck out because it was brought under the wrong legal provisions, as there are specific provisions under the Companies Act for winding up matters, and the applicant failed to comply with the requirement to cite the correct enabling law. Additionally, the applicant's reply submissions were filed out of time and were disregarded.

Citation
ayman m alkharaf vs aymanouf safaris limited and one another 2021 tzhccomd 3485 12 december 2021
Parties
Applicant: Ayman M. Alkharaf; 1st Respondent: Aymanouf Safaris Limited; 2nd Respondent: Yusuph Rashid Kazi
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
12 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Application struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Winding Up Proceedings, Interim Injunctions, Proper Citation of Enabling Provisions, Preliminary Objection
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Company Law Winding Up Proceedings Interim Injunctions Proper Citation of Enabling Provisions Preliminary Objection

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ayman M. Alkharaf

Applicant

Aymanouf Safaris Limited

1st Respondent

Yusuph Rashid Kazi

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether reply submissions were filed out of time as per court scheduling order
  2. 2 Whether the applicant cited the wrong provision of law to move the court
  3. 3 What reliefs are available to the parties

Ratio Decidendi

The application was struck out because it was brought under the wrong legal provisions, as there are specific provisions under the Companies Act for winding up matters, and the applicant failed to comply with the requirement to cite the correct enabling law. Additionally, the applicant's reply submissions were filed out of time and were disregarded.

Court Disposition

Application struck out with costs

Orders

  • Preliminary Objection upheld
  • Application struck out with costs