dominical paul and another vs sabina yohana and another 2021 tzhc 7518 9 november 2021
Preference of revision as a remedy after dismissal of appeal and failed restoration applications constitutes procedural impropriety; respondents should have pursued restoration and appeal before revision. Extension of time for revision was wrongly granted.
- Citation
- dominical paul and another vs sabina yohana and another 2021 tzhc 7518 9 november 2021
- Parties
- 1st Appellant: Dominical Paul; 2nd Appellant: Rock City Takers Ltd; 1st Respondent: Sabina Yohana; 2nd Respondent: Paulo Apolinary
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 9 November 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Revision Vs Appeal, Jurisdiction, Restoration of Dismissed Appeal
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dominical Paul
1st Appellant
Rock City Takers Ltd
2nd Appellant
Sabina Yohana
1st Respondent
Paulo Apolinary
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether extension of time for revision was properly granted after dismissal of appeal
- 2 Whether revision is an appropriate remedy when appeal was already preferred
- 3 Jurisdiction of the Primary Court
Ratio Decidendi
Preference of revision as a remedy after dismissal of appeal and failed restoration applications constitutes procedural impropriety; respondents should have pursued restoration and appeal before revision. Extension of time for revision was wrongly granted.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Proceedings in Misc. Civil Application No. 1 of 2021 quashed
- Ruling and order set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment