19910117 TZHC Dar es Salaam

IH Till!! IuG:.-: COUTIT OF TANZANIA AT Dlill ES Sil.Lil.Ari CIVIL APP::~\L. NO. 29 OF 1990 Ilfu.1luX~ANI 1rfOi1I •••• , ••.• APPELLllIJT VERS"JS M/S ITAULE [:. COHP • . iuJV• ., • RESPOUDE'l-JT ... . . . IlULING ,. MICfAWA • ~ J• ·...r. 'lbis is 1Jasio.o.11Y on ~plioo;tion foil: l,9avo to oa_)poal out of tine to thia c,01.1,J:'t ancl s-'i;~ of c::ccu-'.;ion ponclincr tho oppeal, ilio opplica.nt waa sued 1):f -t.:10 itt,spondent before ·i;l1.c Re~dent Macrist:i:i/liO's Oourt at Kis1.r'ru ·who:r:oupon jud.~cnt mi.s entered D.t1<linst hitl. IIo now seeks to appeal to t:lis court acoins-'i; -~he' cloois;i.011 of tho tridt. oourt, 'llie applicant has, hmrcvcr, lcoxrr'.; that as he hoo filed h1a intondod o.pponl outside tho locru. pcrm.ssablc pctiod, !Io hrua tb.erc;f'o:cc ·to obtmn loavo. of this oouri to do so and hence this instant application; This .natter. p:roccedoc~ c::-:-1ntdc because the .rcspoodgnt 'e advooatc l'ofusocl scrvico sunraons ·on the e,Touncls tho.t this ~)plication Wall set c.lmrn for hea:rinc qn 11th 11.pril, 1991 and not the 15·i;h January, 1991. IJ.lrl.s 1)cin0 the state of nt-Zro.~s I find nwsclf oor,1pcllcd to mention tl1.a-'.:; ·li.:.1is new date WM scjii c101nt oonsequcnt to .ti.10 applicant 1a applic,:i:ii:i.on fo:r: 3J'l on:Ly hc..:ti~'l.G dato under ccrtifio~tc ,of Ul!ffOllOY • The applicru.r'.:; in his aff'ic1.avi t in support of this applico.tion has deposcc1 i;l1at jm10:1cnt nero.ns-'i; b.iia wos dcMvcrcd on 30t:1 NtV 1990,. On 9th June 1990 lie ncnt to the Civil Roc,i.stry- of the Col'.I't of the Rcsidcn-'i; Ma..3istrate D/v ~~st1tu. with his rclovru.l''v pnpcra to have ·;;J;;.c;.1 filocl for his intone.ad appeal -'.;o this court. ITc fm·ther avc:rs that -'i;:.1e coUJ:t offioinl hcliovcc1 to rcourc the said p2pc:rs on the grounds that tiac for his appeal hud <llrcac\Y c:r.:pi:r ed. On rc'bu-'i;".:;ru. •foe :responclcnt has through hia counto:c~c::i;Eficln.vi t ohallcnc;c<l. this instw1t n.pplication inter nlia on tho followi11G £;TOlU1c1s :- • iJ ( 1) fue a.f-i'idavi t docs not disclose sou:rce of irii'or.·.12,tion. (ii) ~10 c2lw11bc:r SUiJ;i1ons is r,ti.sconcci ved Mcl/oT: fov.nc1eclo on no lwr. (iii) Tb.a applicru1t has not roisocl sufficient oauso to .support )his a1jplicationo 2 I havo cnxcfully considcrocl. the al'"C'lmonts raisoa.· f;r:011 both sidos. 1 or di sput O/~a . no d ou).., Th ore J.S .1. t rJ.t.F-.,....,•~ poin as llo~«+, . t in . t od 'b,y tl10 ;r:ospond on . hi s countor-a!fidavi t that tho applioat~on does not state under what pr.ovision of the lol'i this na_)plication is brouc~ht. fut this stato of affa.il's is undcrtablo as the applicant is a leymon and had no a.ssistn11co from a. tounscl in bringing action, As this is clll· application for· loavo to appeal out of tirao and st¼)r of a=coution ponding tho c1.o-'Gormination ' . of the intondod appoal, it is reasonable and fair to treat it is. an a.p.plication broue-ht undo:r tho 1:>rovisions of section 14 ( 1) of the Lall of Limitation Act,· 1971 (Act No. 10 of 1971) and Order 39 rule 5 (4) olf? tho criminal. Proooduro Act rcspootivcll(. I have further noted other irro@llaritios in the doponont 1s offidavit taking into account the most cclorabratod oDSo of STJ\HDARD GOODS CORPORATiqi~ . LTD. v1 P.JI.RAI' CilllHD NATIIP.N & co.• , (1950) 17 EACA 99 whore the defunct COUJ:'t of appeal f'or Eastern .Af'ricn. held that when an a.ffidavi-'i; is mode in · inforr.1D.,tion it should not bo acted upon by Dr'JY court unless tho sources of infomation ono Spccifilcd. lfi1.ilo cb-rolling on ~t-t;or _I Wldorstanc1. ·that proccc1.ural rul.os .µ:-o intended to sorvo as tho J:.1~~~ of justice and not to def c(t;I; 01" ~tr4.to it, ..:ind it can bo .doni eel that tho strict applioc1tio11 of the rule .in question mey in cortoin cases amount to loeaJ_ foJ:iilaJ.ision. In tho light of the forocoinG I a.r,1 of tho settled v.i.aw that this eou.rt like DrJY' othor oourt wol'iiby its none has tho 1u ty TO LOOK IlJTO 'lLB Mil.TrER SYMl'ATITETICALLY With a 1)ura,c1. niml n:1cl. 1;1ost realistic appl'oach. In O!.'<.lcr to do justice to the caso, ospccial'.1.y in a case where , a loJ,'nn.n2 a.."1ZIWaro of the process of the machinery of ji.tsticc, trios to 6 ot .'remed,y pttoooc1ural rules should not be used to dofeo.t justice~ On ray view tho irrocrula:ritics in tho aff'idavi t arc Cl,ll'ablc by the provisions of section 95 of tho Civil Procedure Code. 'lhe hasio l)oint for consid.cration and dotornination in -'i;hc instant application is irhothcr tho applicant had reasonable or sufficient cause on which this court moy m:orcisc its discroti ve and o::;;-'Gcncl the time for appeal. As there a:ro no reasons wby I should disbelieve -'i;he applicant 1s axplanation.. ilavill(s' rec-a.rd to all the factm and the oirourastro:cos of this ca.so, I finc1 that the applicant has shown sufficient cause for all~WillG his application.. In tho rosul t leave to appeal of tii.1e ru.td sta;:,~ of e:,;:eoution pencline tho cletcnaination of' the appeal axe acoordinc{ly e,:r:-rottod. The a1)plioari-'li should file his appeal to this cour-'i; within twenty one cloys (21) fron this date upon pa;yin.3 tho usual feos in tirao. ,; -- 3 - Tl;lc ot1,ttcr_ to ~)0 r.iontioncd boto;co tho Roc;istrai on tho ~ld Fo~y; 1991 •m.th a v.L~r 1o fL"':il'lB' a hoarinff. date. Tho r_osu~ ts of this rulil'lG ·. ~ should bo broU£;ht to tho notioa of tho· Rospond<lt1t. ~dar a D O ~ J. J •. Mid-rA:-TA .JUDGE 1iz~1~91 · COUR'l't i:thc lbl1ing ia road. in cilamho:i::lil in tho p:r:csonce of the fJP:Pli~- J,. J.. MIDIA1-T A J·U·D GE 17 .1.91 I OERTISFY' TIIll.'l' IT IS A TRUE COP'l TI1ROM TITE OIUGll~AL. · D.AR ES SALAA!L