nur hussein and abdikhan ismail 1997 tzca 57 23 december 1997

HT TH3 COURT. OP App:iAL OF TAITZA1IL- AT DAu. 2S SAL .-J I Ail C IV IL APPLICA'HOIT ITO. 11 OF Y .-% betkzeel: ITUit BUS .H IT - A lIL I^ r AED ABDIK3A1I ISiiAIL - IiE3PClID_Ji:'T ( a p p l ic a t io n f o r s ta y o f e x e c u tio n o f JDDGii..HliT o f tb s Hi&h Court* o f Tanzania a t A rusha) (M. D. JTohalla, J . ) d ated th e 13th day o f Decembery 1596 in C i v i l Case Ho. 30 _o£ .1525 HU L I H G SAMATQA, J A * T h is i s a s h o rt a p p l i c a t i o n , i n whioh. the a p p lic a n t, lia r Hussein^ i s seek in g an o rd e r f o r s ta y o f oxoo u tion o f the d ecreo mado fo llo w in g th e d e c is io n o f the High Court (iT challa j ) i n C i v i l Case Uq, 30 1994 pending the d e te rm in a tio n o f the ap p eal in ten d ed to bo Xodjod a g a in s t th e s a id d c c re e i n t M s C o u rt. The p r i n c ip a l b a s is f o r th .0 a p p lic a tio n i s t h a t i f th e e x e c u tio n i s allow ed to tak a p la co b efo re the in ten d ed ap p eal i s determ ined the a p p lic a n t m i l s u f f e r i r r e p a r a b ly in ju ry ^ The a p p l i c a t i o n i s opposed by tho respondent^ Abdikhan SsmaiJ,* The background to the a p p lic a tio n may be sunmariiiod. a s fo llo w s^ The a p p lic a n t p e titio n e d the Ilifh. C ourt f o r g ra n t o f l e t t e r s e f a d m in is tr a tio n i n r e s p e c t o f the e s t a t e of h i s l a t e b ro th e r^ I s m a il H u sse in . The responden t* who i s one o f tiied ocaased 1s c h ild r e n , e n te re d a c a v e a t under s* 5^ ( 1) o f the P ro b a te and A d m in istra tio n O rdin-nce (th e O rdinance) and e v e n tu a lly on torod appearance i n acco rd a n ce w ith the p r o v is io n s of s c 59( 2) o f tho Ordin^io© and Utile 82o f tho P re b a te jlu le s . I n the s u i t which emerged from the so s te p s , the a p p lic a n t a s s e r te d th a t th e house which was s . i d to con st!'irate th e doooasod* s o staiQ was j o i n t l y owned by the deceased and h im s e lf . According, to the respondent^ however, th e house wqs w holly owned by t ’_e d eceased , Itw was n ot i n aisp u t© th a t th e a p p lic a n t had been liv in g i n tLo house a t l e a s t sin ce 1993 and c o l l e c t i n g r e n t from a te n a n t occupying p art of i t . Ee i s s t i l l liv i n g 'th ere, The le a r n e d t r i a l Judge h eld th a t the is s u e whether tho house was j o i n t l y owned as a s s e rte d was proaaturely brought b e fo r e m e Court and t h a t , a lte r n a tiv e ly , the su it iras 'bad i n law f o r nonr-joiixler 9 the o th e r h e ir s to th e e s t a t e havin g not been nv’ de p a r t ie s t a o r o t o . The learned Judge nevertheless proceeded to appoint the respondent and tho e l d e s t son o f the fix -s t w ife o f th e doooascd as " j o i n t adm ini stra to rs o f th e s iiith o u s e ” j and to o rd er t i t "th e p l c i i n t i f f (now th e a p p lic a n t) w i l l con tin u e r e s id in g i n the suithouso as a tenant e f f e c t i v e fron 1st January, 1997 and w i l l pay such m onthly r e n t as the adm ini s tra to r s h e r e in a p p oin ted t r i l l f i x i n accordance w ith the Rent R e s t r ic t io n Aot H o. 17/1984. The r e n t to he r e a lis e d cbr c o llo c t c d from tho suith ouse i s to bo a p p lie d to the b e n e f it o f the b on ef ie ia r io s and h e ir s o f th e la to Ism a il H u s s e i n . The lea rn ed Judge so,id he made th is d e c is io n in the i n t e r e s t s o f j u s t i c e . The is s u e b e fo r e mo i s whether tho in ten d ed appeal lias o u n c e s o f success and whether any in ju r y o r lo s s th a t may be caused t o the a p p lic a n t as a r e s u l t o f th e d ecree being; execu ted b e fo r e the h e a rin g o f the a p p e a l would be ir r e p e r a b le . I ua in c lin e d to answer both q u e s tio n s i n th e a f f i r m a t i v e . Priraa f a c i e , i t i s d o u b tfu l th a t, h a vin g h e ld th a t tho s u i t was bad f o r n o n -jo in d e r and, a l t e r n a t i v e l y , th a t the is s u e to u ch in g upon ownership o f th e house was p r e a a tu r e ly brought b e fo r e him, th© le a rn e d t r i a l Judge had power i n law to make the o rd e rs he su b sequ en tly made i n tile c a s e . The a p p e lla n t ar;:so:,:tod bcfor<# me, sjaai tho respondent d id n o t v e n tu re to c o n tr a d ic t the a b o r t i o n , th a t i f he i s f^ c o e d . vagati® from th e house now he w i l l not ;:o a ^ le to f in d a lt e r n a t iv e accQmodati®jl f o r h im s e lf and h is e ig h t dependants, in c lu d in g h|s. e & d e rly m other j It seems t o me th a t the lo s s the a p p lic a n t i s l i b a l y to s u f f e r as a jyesu^t o f the d ecree b e in g execu ted b e fo r e tho d e te rm in a tio n o f th e inteixLod appeal,1 w i l l be ir r e p a r a b le . For tho reasons I have ;;?.von, I am s a t i s f i e d that i t would be in the in te r e s ts o f ju s t ic e to o rd e r s ta y o f e& ecution in -this case. Accordingly, I a llo w tho a p p lic a t io n w ith c o s ts and o rd er th a t tho e x o y u tio a o f th e deQreo made f o l l o w in g the judgement o f i j f o l ^ l l a J d e liv e r e d on. JDo^emboy be sta y ed podning tho d ete rm in a tio n o f th e inten ded appe,. DATED a t DAR ES SALAAM t h i s 23rd day o f D ecem ber, 199 7 e Bo A* SAMATTA JUSTICE OF APPEAL I c e r tify th a t th is i s a tr u e cop y o f th e o r i g i n a l « ( M.S. ^ I )„ DEPUTY REGISTRAR