Geoman
The applicant demonstrated the existence of a difficult point of law and a dispute to be resolved, which justifies granting unconditional leave to appear and defend the suit.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- Geoman
- Parties
- Applicant: Geoman Cane Estate Limited; Respondent: The Office of the Attorney General
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 1 January 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appear and Defend Summary Suit
- Outcome
- Application granted
- Legal Topics
- Summary Suits, Leave to Defend, Amendment of Industry Regulation, Co Operative Societies
- 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
Geoman Cane Estate Limited
Applicant
The Office of the Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appear and Defend Summary Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient grounds to be granted leave to appear and defend the summary suit
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant demonstrated the existence of a difficult point of law and a dispute to be resolved, which justifies granting unconditional leave to appear and defend the suit.
Court Disposition
Application granted
Orders
- Unconditional leave to appear and defend Civil Case No 15465 of 2024 is granted
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA MOROGORO SUB-REGISTRY AT MOROGORO [Miscellaneous Civil Application No 22389 of 2024 being an application for leave to appear and defend the suit arising from Civii Case No 15465 of 2024] BETWEEN GEOMAN CANE ESTATE LIMITED APPLICANT Versus THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RESPONDENT RULING MRUMA,3. This Is an application for leave to appear and defend a summary suit file pursuant to the provisions of Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code. The Respondent, the honourable Attorney General instituted Civil Case No 15465 of 2024 suing the Applicant herein Geoman Cane Estate Limited for among other orders an order for payment of Shillings 107,336, 205/- (Say shillings One Hundred Seven Million Three Hundred Thirty-Six Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Five), being unremitted members' contributions plus accumulated penalties thereon due and payable to the Respondent (Plaintiff) by the Applicant (Defendant). Pursuant to the provisions of Ruie 2 (2) of Order XXXV of the Civii Procedure Code [Cap 33 R.E. 2019], in any case in which the plaint and summons are in the form of a summary suit as per Rule 2(1)of the same Order, the Defendant cannot appear and defend the suit unless he obtain leave from the judge or magistrate so to appear and defend. Pursuant to the provisions of Ruie 3 (1) upon disclosing facts incumbent upon the holder to prove consideration and which are sufficient to support the application, court is obliged to give leave to the Defendant to appear and defend the suit. In the present application the Applicant asserts that the amendment of the Tanzania Sugar Board Act in 2017 which forced ail sugar cane farmers both small and large scale farmers to join a Co-operative Society styled Agricultural Marketing Corporative Society (AMCOS), has created some technicalities and setbacks in harvesting sugar cane crops particularly from large scale producers as a result of which there was decline in harvesting sugar cane. Generally, leave to appear and defend pursuant to Order XXXV Ruie 3 of the Civil Procedure Code will be granted unconditionally where the Applicant shows that he or she has good defence on merits or that there is a dispute which has to be tried or that a difficult point of law is involved. In the present application the Applicant has asserted that there was an amendment of the law which regulates the industry and which has created some difficulties in harvesting of sugar cane from large scale producers and a serious drop in yields and sales. The Respondent didn t challenge this assertion. In other words, the Respondent does not dispute existence of those difficulties and delays resulted from the amendment of the sais law. I therefore find that both a difficult point of law and a dispute which has to be resolved exist and these justifies the grant of leave to appear and defend the suit. Accordingly, unconditional leave to appear and defend Civil Case No 15465 of 2024 is granted as prayed with no orders as to the costs. 17 A.R. MRUMA \ Uj X h- >- JUDGE 7. 2. 2025