devotha mathew minja vs tito simon haule and 2 others 2021 tzhclandd 824 19 january 2021

devotha mathew minja vs tito simon haule and 2 others 2021 tzhclandd 824 19 january 2021

The applicant established sufficient cause for non-appearance by providing evidence of official parliamentary duties, which, though lodged late, justified restoration of the suit under Order IX Rule 9(1) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Citation
devotha mathew minja vs tito simon haule and 2 others 2021 tzhclandd 824 19 january 2021
Parties
Applicant: Devota Mathew Minja; 1st Respondent: Tito Simon Haule; 2nd Respondent: Tanzania Postal Bank; 3rd Respondent: Msolopa Investment Co. Ltd
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
19 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal Order
Outcome
Application allowed; suit restored
Legal Topics
Restoration of Suit, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Sufficient Cause for Non Appearance
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Restoration of Suit Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Sufficient Cause for Non Appearance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Devota Mathew Minja

Applicant

Tito Simon Haule

1st Respondent

Tanzania Postal Bank

2nd Respondent

Msolopa Investment Co. Ltd

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sufficient cause was shown to set aside the dismissal order in Land Case No. 372 of 2015

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established sufficient cause for non-appearance by providing evidence of official parliamentary duties, which, though lodged late, justified restoration of the suit under Order IX Rule 9(1) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; suit restored

Orders

  • Land Case No. 372 of 2015 is restored.
  • No order as to costs; each party to bear own costs.