galsheet kenya ltd vs aj kavishe and also ta njiwa hardware kavishe hardware amest hardware 2 others 2012 tzhccomd 1 7 september 2012

galsheet kenya ltd vs aj kavishe and also ta njiwa hardware kavishe hardware amest hardware 2 others 2012 tzhccomd 1 7 september 2012

The Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the Defendants owed the claimed sums, as evidence did not sufficiently establish non-payment or dishonour of cheques/telegraphic transfers, and the Defendants' alleged overpayments were not properly pleaded or substantiated.

Citation
galsheet kenya ltd vs aj kavishe and also ta njiwa hardware kavishe hardware amest hardware 2 others 2012 tzhccomd 1 7 september 2012
Parties
Plaintiff: Galsheet Kenya Ltd; 1st Defendant: A.J. Kavishe t/a Njiwa Hardware, Kavishe Hardware, Amest Hardware; 2nd Defendant: Njiwa Corrugated G.S.I Sheets M.F.G. Co. Ltd/Njiwa Corrugated Sheets Manufactures Ltd; 3rd Defendant: Njiwa Corrugated Sheets Manufacturers Limited
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
7 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Judgment
Outcome
Suit dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Debt Recovery, Contractual Obligations, Pleadings and Evidence
Source Language
English
Commercial Law Sale of Goods Debt Recovery Contractual Obligations Pleadings and Evidence

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Galsheet Kenya Ltd

Plaintiff

A.J. Kavishe t/a Njiwa Hardware, Kavishe Hardware, Amest Hardware

1st Defendant

Njiwa Corrugated G.S.I Sheets M.F.G. Co. Ltd/Njiwa Corrugated Sheets Manufactures Ltd

2nd Defendant

Njiwa Corrugated Sheets Manufacturers Limited

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Defendant traded as Kavishe Hardware and Amest Hardware
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff sold and delivered goods to the Defendants and if so, whether the Defendants paid fully for goods sold and delivered
  3. 3 What reliefs, if any, are the parties entitled to

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the Defendants owed the claimed sums, as evidence did not sufficiently establish non-payment or dishonour of cheques/telegraphic transfers, and the Defendants' alleged overpayments were not properly pleaded or substantiated.

Court Disposition

Suit dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Plaintiff's suit is dismissed with costs to be taxed
  • Security for costs of USD 3,500 deposited by Plaintiff to be taken into account if deposited