biabana ltd vs wilbard mikigo and others 2021 tzhcld 36 9 march 2021

biabana ltd vs wilbard mikigo and others 2021 tzhcld 36 9 march 2021

The applicant proved ownership of the attached properties through documentary evidence, and the 1st respondent failed to provide evidence to the contrary. The assets do not belong to the 2nd respondent, the judgment debtor, and are not liable for attachment in execution of the decree.

Citation
biabana ltd vs wilbard mikigo and others 2021 tzhcld 36 9 march 2021
Parties
Applicant: Biabana Limited; 1st Respondents/decree Holder: Wilbards M. Ikigo & 39 Others; 2nd Respondent/decree Debtor: Abana Printers Ltd; 3rd Respondent/court Broker: Sensitive Auction Mart
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
9 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Objection to Warrant of Attachment
Outcome
Application allowed
Legal Topics
Execution of Decrees, Objection Proceedings, Corporate Personality, Ownership of Attached Property
Source Language
English
Labour Law Civil Procedure Execution of Decrees Objection Proceedings Corporate Personality Ownership of Attached Property

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Biabana Limited

Applicant

Wilbards M. Ikigo & 39 Others

1st Respondents/decree Holder

Abana Printers Ltd

2nd Respondent/decree Debtor

Sensitive Auction Mart

3rd Respondent/court Broker

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Objection to Warrant of Attachment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the assets listed in the warrant of attachment belong to the applicant or the 2nd respondent
  2. 2 Whether the assets listed are liable for execution

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant proved ownership of the attached properties through documentary evidence, and the 1st respondent failed to provide evidence to the contrary. The assets do not belong to the 2nd respondent, the judgment debtor, and are not liable for attachment in execution of the decree.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

  • Order of attachment in Execution No. 55/2018 lifted
  • No order as to costs