20140227 TZCA Arusha
The applicant demonstrated good cause for the delay in serving the Notice of Appeal and other documents, as evidenced by affidavits detailing unsuccessful attempts at service. There being no objection from the present respondents, the extension of time is justified and substituted service is appropriate for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 20140227 TZCA Arusha
- Parties
- Applicant: Bank of Tanzania; Respondent: Margareth Kumalija; Respondent: Eva Msamo; Respondent: Lucas Masigazwa; Respondent: Zuhura Mbulu; Respondent: Evarist Muze
- Court
- TZCA
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 27 February 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to Serve Notice of Appeal and Other Documents
- Outcome
- Application granted
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Service of Process, Substituted Service
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Bank of Tanzania
Applicant
Margareth Kumalija
Respondent
Eva Msamo
Respondent
Lucas Masigazwa
Respondent
Zuhura Mbulu
Respondent
Evarist Muze
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to Serve Notice of Appeal and Other Documents
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for extension of time to serve Notice of Appeal and other documents
- 2 Whether substituted service by registered post is appropriate for respondents whose whereabouts are unknown
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant demonstrated good cause for the delay in serving the Notice of Appeal and other documents, as evidenced by affidavits detailing unsuccessful attempts at service. There being no objection from the present respondents, the extension of time is justified and substituted service is appropriate for respondents whose whereabouts are unknown.
Court Disposition
Application granted
Orders
- Applicant granted thirty (30) days from the date of the ruling to serve the relevant documents to the respondents.
- Third, fourth, and fifth respondents to be served by way of Registered Post.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA ATARUSHA CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11 OF 2013 ..,· BANK OF TANZANIA ..................................................... APPLICANT VERSUS 1. MARGARETH KUMALIJA 2. EVA MSAMO 3. LUCAS MASIGAZWA .................. RESPONDENTS 4. ZUHURA MBULU s. EVARIST MUZE (Application for extension of time within which to serve the respondents Notice of Appeal and other documents, from the decision I of the High Court of Tanzania at Arusha) I 'I I' • I I (Massengi, J.) 'I Dated the 19th day of December, 2012 In Misc. Civil Application No. 86 of 2006 RULING Date 27Feb. & 4 March, 2014 BWANA, J.A.: '· ,1 1 : This application has a chequered history extending from 1995. While I ,, ·I 1 : the applicant had the services of Mr. Elvaison Maro, learned Advocate, the \ respondents at one time had M/s Herbert Makange and Company as their 'i ',1 advocates, up to 19 December, 2012. Thereafter, Mr. Makange declined services on behalf of the respondents for lack of instructions. Subsequent effects to trace the respondents' physical addresses were partly successful. Only the first and second respondents were found and attended the Court's 1 2014. The whereabout of the other respondents is not known and that led Mr. Maro to pray for substituted service by way of Registered post pursuant to Rule 22 (1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 and Order V Rule 21(1) of the Civil Procedure Code (the CPC). This Notice of Motion was filed pursuant to Rule 10, 22(1) (8) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2009 (the Rules). In an application of this kind, the applicant has to show good cause to justify the delay by explaining to the satisfaction of the Court why he could not comply with the time frame provided under the law. The Notice of Motion lodged here is supported by affidavits of Mr. Maro, Advocate, and some other staff of his law firm and a Dar es Salaam based process server employed by the Judiciary. All these persons aver in their respective affidavits why their attempts to have the respondents served were not successful; the obstacles they faced, and the like. This is in line with the decision of this Court in Haidari Thabit Kombo & 10 Others vs Abbas Khatib Haji & Another; Civil Application No. 207 of 2006 ( unreported) where it stated: 2 "Before this Court was an application for extension of time. What was needed were reasons to explain why the delay ..... such reasons would be evidential and woul~ have to appear in the supporting affidavit. .. (emphasis provided) I adopt the same. Having gone through the affidavits and the reasons for the delay shown and there having no objection to the application from the first and second respondents who attended Court proceedings, I grant the application. Therefore, the applicant is granted thirty (30) days from the date of delivery of this Ruling - within which to serve the relevant documents to the respondents. Third, fourth and fifth respondents to be served by way of Registered Post. It is so ordered. DATED at ARUSHA this 27th day of February, 2014. SJ. BWANA JUSTICE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a of th I DE RE C TOFA 3 . ··- ----- -- - .... ·--- ------=- - - ~,-----':-~ - .... -· .. . .,...-__ ---------- - . .. ··• ..... ""· ..~.. .... -• . . . . .. ·. ' .