SCAN 18728

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION)

AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC LAND APPLICATION NO. 18728 OF 2024

BETWEEN DOROTHY ANDREW MPAKA........................................................APPLICANT

VERSUS VICTOR MUTAHANGARWA MPAKA................................... 1st RESPONDENT MANYARA SUNFLOWER CO LIMITED.............................. 2nd RESPONDENT CRDB BANK PLC ................................................................. 3rd RESPONDENT LOCUS DEBT MANAGEMENT LIMITED............................... 4th RESPONDENT

RULING 26/9/2024 A, MSAFIRI, J, This is a ruling on the Application filed under certificate of urgency which was brought by an applicant Dorothy Andrew Mpaka against the four respondents as here in above. The Application was brought under Order XXXVII Rule 1 (a) and Section 95, all of the Civil Procedure Code Cap 33 R.E. 2019 (the CPC). The applicant is seeking for the following orders interpartes; a) That the Honourable Court be pleased to issue on order for maintenance of status quo ante to restrain the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents, their directors, employees, servants, agents, their i assignees or any alleged buyer from alienating, disposing or transfer of Plot No. 101 Block 11 CT 61512 Mbeni Mpiji, Kinondoni District, Dar es Salaam whilst the main suit filed by the applicant awaits final determination. b) That the Honourable Court be pleased to issue an injunction order against 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents. c) That costs to be in due cause. d) Any other reliefs (s) this Honourable Court may deem fit and just to grant. The application was supported by an affidavit of the applicant. The 3rd & 4th respondents also filed a counter affidavit through one Norbert Chaula, an employee of the 3rd respondent. The 1st and 2nd respondents did not file their counter affidavits as they were not contesting the application. When the matter was set for hearing, the applicant was

represented by Mr Shalom Msaky, learned Advocate while the 3rd & 4th respondents were represented by Mr. Walter Massawe, learned Advocate. Briefly, according to the contents of the affidavit in support of an application, the applicant claims to be the wife of the 1st respondent Victor Mutahangarwa Mpaka and that they have been living in Plot No. 101 Block. 2 11, CT 61512 Mbweni Mpiji, Kinondoni District (herein the suit plot) for the past 17years, and that the suit plot is their matrimonial home. The applicant claims further that the 1st respondent without knowledge or consent from the applicant, has used the suit plot as a security for the 2nd respondent to enable her to secure a mortgage from the 3rd Respondent for a loan amounting to TZS 261,040,817.59/= That, on 23rd July 2024, the applicant became aware that the suit plot has been sold by way of auction due to the default by the 1st and 2nd respondents in repaying the loan. The applicant contends that the entirety of the mortgage and the claimed amount are illegal and null for failure to obtain the spousal consent from her. The applicant argued that if the respondents are allowed to proceed with the disposition and change of ownership of the suit plot then such act will occasion the applicant's irreparable loss of being evicted to the streets and loss of home for her children. The applicant stated that on a balance of

convenience, it is her who will suffer greater hardship and injustice if the injunctive orders are withheld, than the respondents if the injunctive orders are granted. She prayed for the Court to grant the sought orders. -f\f I L. 3 As said earlier, the 1st and 2nd respondents did not contest the application and to express that, they never filed counter affidavits. As for the 3rd and 4th respondents represented by Mr. Massawe, at first, they were in contest of this application and filed their counter affidavit. However, later, Mr. Massawe informed the Court that the 3rd and 4th respondents do not wish to contest the application any more and urged the Court to grant the same so as the parties can focus on the main case. Having gone through the affidavit of the applicant, I am satisfied that the contents of the affidavit meets all three mandatory conditions set in the celebrated case of Attilio vs. Mbowe (1969) HCD. Considering that the application was not contested, I proceed to grant the same with no order as to the costs. A temporary injunction is hereby entered on the suit Plot described as Plot No. 101 Block 11 Mbweni Mpiji, Kinondoni District, Dar es Salaam against the respondents and any persons acting on their behalf. It is so ordered 4