dr philip allan lema vs peter tegemea ndatele 2022 tzhclandd 12333 26 september 2022

dr philip allan lema vs peter tegemea ndatele 2022 tzhclandd 12333 26 september 2022

The applicant failed to account for each day of the 51-day delay after the striking out of the previous revision application, and reasons for the delay were not properly pleaded in the affidavit. Therefore, sufficient cause for extension of time was not established.

Citation
dr philip allan lema vs peter tegemea ndatele 2022 tzhclandd 12333 26 september 2022
Parties
Applicant: Dr. Philip Allan Lema; 1st Respondent: Peter Tegemea Ndatele; 2nd Respondent: Ilala Municipal Council; 3rd Respondent: Tulipo Helton Mwakabuli
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
26 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Case Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Revision Proceedings, Limitation of Actions, Joinder of Parties, Illegality as Ground for Extension
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Extension of Time Revision Proceedings Limitation of Actions Joinder of Parties Illegality as Ground for Extension

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Philip Allan Lema

Applicant

Peter Tegemea Ndatele

1st Respondent

Ilala Municipal Council

2nd Respondent

Tulipo Helton Mwakabuli

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Case Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause for extension of time to file an application for revision against the judgment and decree in Application No.102 of 2016

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to account for each day of the 51-day delay after the striking out of the previous revision application, and reasons for the delay were not properly pleaded in the affidavit. Therefore, sufficient cause for extension of time was not established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for extension of time is dismissed with costs.