charles moses vs principal secretary ministry of education vocation training another 2012 tzhc 196 27 november 2012
- Citation
- charles moses vs principal secretary ministry of education vocation training another 2012 tzhc 196 27 november 2012
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 27 November 2012
- Posture
- Land Case / Ruling on Withdrawal and Preliminary Objections
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 27 November 2012
- Posture
- Land Case / Ruling on Withdrawal and Preliminary Objections
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The suit was struck out with costs due to persistent non-appearance of both parties and failure to prosecute, without determination of preliminary objections or dismissal on merits.
Court disposition
Suit struck out with costs
Orders
- Suit struck out from court records
- Parties to be notified
02
Material facts
Parties
Charles Moses
Plaintiff Counsel: Mr. MasakaPrincipal Secretary Ministry of Education Vocation Training
1st DefendantAttorney General
2nd Defendant03
Procedural history
Posture
Land Case / Ruling on Withdrawal and Preliminary Objections
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the suit should be withdrawn with liberty to file afresh
- 02
Whether preliminary objections should be determined before withdrawal
- 03
Effect of parties' non-appearance
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Plaintiff sought to withdraw the suit with liberty to file afresh due to defects in the plaint.
- Respondent
- Defendants raised preliminary objections: no cause of action against 1st and 3rd Defendants, amended plaint filed to pre-empt objections, and suit is time barred.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Civil Procedure Code
Court may strike out a suit for want of prosecution or non-appearance of parties.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The suit was struck out with costs due to persistent non-appearance of both parties and failure to prosecute, without determination of preliminary objections or dismissal on merits.
Obiter and limits
- Court noted intention not to dismiss the suit but to strike it out, allowing for possible refiling.
Court disposition
Suit struck out with costs
- Suit struck out from court records
- Parties to be notified
Source and reliance status
TZHC · 27 November 2012
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TZHC
Judgment· 27 November 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION)
AT DAR ES SALAAM LAND CASE NO. 242 OF 2006
CHARLES MOSES PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF EDUCATION VOCATION TRAINING .... 1st DEFENDANT ATTORNEY GENERAL........................ 2nd DEFENDANT
RULING A.F. Ngwala,J. On 21/05/2009 the Plaintiff, through the services of Mr. Masaka, learned advocate made and oral application that this suit be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh suit. The reason for withdraw being that there are some defeats on the Plaint which can be cured by way of filing a fresh suit. Because there were Preliminary Objections against the Plaintiffs suit this court made a finding that it would deal with the Preliminary Objections before entertaining the application for withdrawal. Before necessary orders could be made the parties have never entered appearance to the Court. The case has been adjourned several times and the parties have not shown reasons for non-' appearance. For avoidance of doubt, the 1st and 3rd Defendants raised their Preliminary Objection on Point of Law that the Plaintiff l has no cause of action against the 1st and 3rd Defendants. They also raised an Objection that the Amended Plaint filed in Court meant to pre- empty the Preliminary Objections. The second Defendant raised his Preliminary Objection that the suit is time barred. Before the Court could hear the Preliminary Objections the parties ceased to appear in Court. What the Court can now do is to expunge this suit from court records. With no intention to dismiss the suit. Accordingly, I struck out the same with costs. A.F. Ngwala, JUDGE, 27/11/2012. Delivered in Court this 27th day of November, 2012 A.F. Ngwala, JUDGE, 27/11/2012. 27/11/2012. Coram , A.F. Ngwala,J. For Plaintiff Absent For Defendant Absent Court: Parties to be notified. A.F. Ngwala, JUDGE, 27/11/2012.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.