doreen alphonce mchawa vs attorney general 6 others 2022 tzhclandd 726 25 july 2022

doreen alphonce mchawa vs attorney general 6 others 2022 tzhclandd 726 25 july 2022

The applicant established a prima facie case by showing she was not a party to the mortgage or a guarantor, thus raising a serious question for determination. The applicant and her children would suffer irreparable loss if rendered homeless, which cannot be compensated monetarily. The balance of convenience favored the applicant, as she would face greater hardship than the respondents if the injunction was not granted. All conditions for granting a temporary injunction were met.

Citation
doreen alphonce mchawa vs attorney general 6 others 2022 tzhclandd 726 25 july 2022
Parties
Applicant: Doreen Alphonce Mchawa; 1st Respondent: Attorney General; 2nd Respondent: Commissioner for Lands; 3rd Respondent: Registrar of Titles; 4th Respondent: Mohamed Abillah Mkanje; 5th Respondent: Equity Bank Tanzania Limited; 6th Respondent: Leonia Paulo Lengwana; 7th Respondent: Mbuzax Auction Mart & Company Ltd
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
25 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Temporary Injunction
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Temporary Injunction, Mortgage, Irreparable Loss, Balance of Convenience
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Temporary Injunction Mortgage Irreparable Loss Balance of Convenience

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Doreen Alphonce Mchawa

Applicant

Attorney General

1st Respondent

Commissioner for Lands

2nd Respondent

Registrar of Titles

3rd Respondent

Mohamed Abillah Mkanje

4th Respondent

Equity Bank Tanzania Limited

5th Respondent

Leonia Paulo Lengwana

6th Respondent

Mbuzax Auction Mart & Company Ltd

7th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Temporary Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from auctioning the suit premises pending determination of the main suit

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established a prima facie case by showing she was not a party to the mortgage or a guarantor, thus raising a serious question for determination. The applicant and her children would suffer irreparable loss if rendered homeless, which cannot be compensated monetarily. The balance of convenience favored the applicant, as she would face greater hardship than the respondents if the injunction was not granted. All conditions for granting a temporary injunction were met.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Temporary injunction granted restraining the respondents from auctioning the suit premises pending hearing and determination of Land Case No. 44 of 2022.
  • Costs shall follow the event.