nur hussein vs abdikhan ismail 1997 tzca 67 23 december 1997

D r H E C0U2SI- OF APPZiAL OF TulTS^in:*.* AT HIS S-.iL -^.-M AR G r v I L APPLXCA'HOII S O . 11 OF V .- % I EETWSEK HUH HUS^EDT - APPLE J*J$T AHD A-TnrnrFTATJ IS L A IL - HESPOEDiilT (a p p lic a tio n f o r sta y o f execu tion o f JtJDGk3JT o f tbs High Court, o f Tanzania a t Arusha) (M. D. ITohalla, J .) dated the 13th day o f December, 1S$6 in. C i v i l Case IIo. 30 o f 1954. E U L I IT G SAMATTAt JA This i s a short a p p lic a tio n , i n \uich the a p p lica n t, Nur Hussein* i s seeking an order f o r stay o f oxoc’a tion o f the decree mado fa llow in g the d e c is io n o f the High Court (iTohalla j ) in C i v i l Casa Ho# -30 f f 1994 pending the do term ination o f the appeal intended to oe lodgad against the sa id deoree i n t l i s C ourt. The p r in c ip a l b a sis f o r the appliQ ation i s that i f the execu tion i s allow ed to take placo before the intendgd appeal i s determined the applicant w i l l s u ffe r irrep a ra b le in ju r y , The a p p lic a tio n i s opposed by tho respondent, Abdikhan E saail* •Tf - The background to the a p p lica tio n may be sunmarisod as fo llo w s , The ap plica n t p e titio n e d tho High Court f o r grant o f l e t t e r s o f adm inistration in resp ect o f the osta to o f h is la te b roth er. Ism ail H ussein. The respondent, who i s one o f thodoceased's ch ild re n , entered a caveat under s , 5 8 ( l) o f the Probato and A dm inistration Ordinance (th e Ordinanoe) and eventioally oritcrcd appoarance i n acoordanoajwith tha p ro v is io n s o f s« 59(2) o f tho Osdin^nco and Hule 82o f tho Probata .Rule 3 . Xn the s u it which emerged from theco step s, the applicant asserted that the house whioh was s . i d to co n stitu te the doooasod*s o sta to was jo in t l y owned by tho deceased and h i a s c l f . According to the respondent, however,, the house wqs w h olly owned by the dooeasod, Itw. was not in dispute that '* the applican t had teen liv in g in tho house at le a s t since 1993 and c o lle c t in g r e n t from a tenant occupying part o f i t . He i s s t i l l liv in g th ere, The learn ed t r i a l Judge lie 3d that the issu e whether the house was jo i n t l y owned as asserted was prematurely brou^Jit bel'orco the Court and th a t, a lt e r n a t iv e ly , the s u it was bad i n law fo r n o n -jo in d e r, the other h e ir s to the esta te hewing not "boon made p a rtie s th o ro to , Tho learned Judge nevertheless proceeded to appoint the respondent and the e ld e s t son o f the f i r s t w ife o f the deceased as " jo i n t adm inistrators o f the su ith o u s e ", and to order thr.t "th e p l a i n t i f f (now the a p p lica n t) w i l l continue resid in g in the suithouse as a tenant e ff e c t iv e frn n 1st January, 1997 and w i l l pay such monthly ren t as the adm inistrators h e re in appointed w ill f i x in accordance with the Rent R e s t r ic t io n Aot No* 17/1984* The rent to "be r e a lis e d sbr o o lle c t e d from the suLthouse i s to "bo a p p lie d to the b e n e fit o f the b e n e fic ia r ie s and h e ir s o f the lat© Ism a il Hussein.M. The learned Judge sa id he mad© th is d e c is io n i n the in t e r e s t s o f ju s t io o . The issu e b efore mo i s whether the intended appeal ha3 ohances su ccess and whether any in ju r y ore lo s s that may be caused to the a p p lioa i^ as a r e s u lt o f the decree b ein g executed "before 'the hearing o f the appeal wou-m ue irreperablo*_ I om in c lin e d to answer both questions in «- '' » the a ffir m a tiv e . Prima f a c i e , i t ia dou btfu l th a t, having h eld that tho s u it was bad f o r n on -join d er and, a ltern a tively> that the issu e touching upon ownership o f tho house was px-omaturcly brought b efore him*- thg. learned t r i a l Judge had power i n law to make the orders he subsequently made in the ca s e . Iho appellant as so:.?tod b efore me, yujfc tVip respondent ‘ ' tan- d id not venture to co n tra d ict tho a sse rtio n , that i f he i s f^ccpd from the house now he w i l l not bo able to fin d a lte rn a tiv e accomodati^ji f o r h im self and h is eigh t dependants, including' h is e ld e r ly m otherj It' seems to me that the lo s s tho applicant i s lilo e ly to s u ffo r as a jposylfc o f the decree being executed b eforo tho determ ination o f the interned appeal w i l l be irrep arab le* ^ •*. For tho reasons I havo fj-von, I am s a t is fie d that i t would be' in tho in t e r e s t s o f ju s tic o to order stay o f execution in th is casog Accordingly| I allow tho a p p lica tio n with c o s ts and ordor that tho' ex ecu tion o f the degree made fo llo w in g the judgement o f u r o l^ lla J d eliv ered on December bo stayed pedning tho determ ination o f the intended appeal^. •• DATED a t DAR E S SALAAM t h i s 23rd day of D ecem ber, 199 7 .