MARTHA MOSHI new

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE SUB - REGISTRY OF MANYARA AT BABATI MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO. 26142 OF 2024 (Arising from the judgment and decree of the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Babad at Babati in Application No. 61 of 2014) BETWEEN MARTHA MOSHI....................................................................... APPLICANT VERSUS BARAZA WAWAE RESPONDENT RULING 10th Dec, 2024 & 24th Jan, 2025 MWIHAMBI, J. This is an application for extension of time to file an appeal against the decision of District Land and Housing Tribunal of Babati at Babati in Application No. 61 of 2024 delivered on 3rd March, 2022. The application is made through chamber summons supported by affidavit of Martha Moshi, the applicant. During the hearing the applicant represented by Mr. Kuwengwa Ndonjekwa, the learned Advocate and the respondent appeared in person, unrepresented. The applicant, through her learned counsel, had i earlier filed written submissions which she sought to adopt as part of the oral submissions along with the affidavit supporting the application. Parties were ordered to address the Court on, among other things, the enabling provision and law that have been applied to move the Court in this application, that is section 42 (1) law of land district courts act, no 2 of2002 (RevisedEdition 2019), the main concern being whether the cited Act exist in laws of this country. Mr. Ndonjekwa, learned Advocate clarified that the application is made under section 41 of the "Land District Courts Act No. 2 Cap. 216 R.E. 2019" and prayed that if there are any discrepancies in the provisions of law that have been applied then this Court be pleased to apply the correct one since the error is clerical and does not go to the root of the matter. This Court is of the view that the repeatedly citing of a non-existing law as written as well as oral submissions makes the application to be incompetent as it has no legs to stand in this Court. In the case of Hussein Mgonja v. The Trustees of the Tanzania Episcopal Conference, CAT-Civil Revision No. 2 of 2002, the Court of Appeal held that: "Ifa party cites the wrong provision of the law the matter becomes incompetent as the Court will not have been properly moved." 2 The same principle developed in the case of China Henan International Cooperation Group v. Saivand K.A. Rwegasira [2006] TLR 220, in which the Court of Appeal held that: ”... worse still the error in citing a wrong and inapplicable rule in support of the application is notin our view, a technicality falling within the scope and purview of Article 107A (2) (e) of the Constitution. It is a matter which goes to the very root of the matter..." Basing from that decision of the Court of Appeal I have the firm view that this application is incompetent as the Court is not properly moved. I therefore strike out with costs. DATED at BABATI this 24th day of January, 2025. N.J. MWIHAMBI JUDGE COURT: Ruling delivered today, 24th day of January, 2025, in the presence of the applicant and her advocate Mr. Kuwengwa Ndonjekwa and the respondent. B/C Miss Fatina R. Haymale (RMA) present. N. J. MWIHAMBI JUDGE 3