20041210 TZCA Dar es salaam
The application was struck out as incompetent because the respondent was not served with the notice of motion, violating mandatory procedural requirements.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 20041210 TZCA Dar es salaam
- Parties
- Applicant: Fred Mteteleka and 6 Others; Respondent: Tanzania Chamber of Commerce Industries & Agricultural
- Court
- TZCA
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 10 December 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application for Injunctive Orders Prior to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application struck out with costs
- Legal Topics
- Injunctions, Competency of Application, Service of Notice
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Fred Mteteleka and 6 Others
Applicant
Tanzania Chamber of Commerce Industries & Agricultural
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Injunctive Orders Prior to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application is competent in the absence of service of notice of motion on the respondent
Ratio Decidendi
The application was struck out as incompetent because the respondent was not served with the notice of motion, violating mandatory procedural requirements.
Court Disposition
Application struck out with costs
Orders
- Application struck out under Rule 3(2)(a) of the Court Rules, 1979
- Applicant to pay costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 26 OF 2004 . In the Matter of an Intended Appeal BETWEEN FRED MTETELEKA AND 6 OTHERS .................................... APPLICANT AND TANZANIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INDUSTRIES & AGRICULTURAL. ..................................... RESPONDENT (Application for injunctive orders from the decision of the High Court of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam) (Masatti, J) dated the 1st day of October, 2003 in Civil Case No. 68 of 2003 ORDER MROSO, J.A.: Mr. Kiwango, learned advocate for the applicant, who ·was duly notified of today's hearing of the application, has not entered appearance. Instead he sent a letter to the Registrar intimating that the application be marked withdrawn. But Mr. Maira, learned advocate for the respondent, has submitted that since he was not served with the notice of motion, the application is incompetent and · there will be nothing to be withdrawn. He has further submitted that in the circumstances, the application .should be struck out under Rule 3 (2) (a) because it has not complied with the requirements of Rule 52(a}. I agree with Mr .. Maira that the application is incompetent for the reasons which were given by Mr. Maira and it is struck out with costs under Rule 3 (2) (a) of the c.ourt Rules, 1979. It is so ordered. 2 DATED at DAR ES SALAAM this 10th day of December, 2004. J. A. MROSO . JUSTICE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy oft ( S. M. RUM YIKA) DEPUTY GISTRAR