Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TANZLII

scanned CASE NO 24149 OF 2024

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Written Statement of Defense filed by the 5th and 6th defendants was defective as it was verified by the plaintiff, not by the defendants themselves, contravening mandatory procedural requirements.

Court disposition

objection sustained, Written Statement of Defense struck out with costs

Orders

  • Written Statement of Defense filed by the 5th and 6th defendants struck out
  • Costs awarded to the plaintiff

02

Material facts

Parties

Gerald Gregory Likena

Plaintiff Counsel: Andrew Miraa

The Attorney General

1st Defendant

Commissioner for Lands

2nd Defendant

Registrar of Titles

3rd Defendant

Kinondoni Municipal Council

4th Defendant

The Registered Trustees of the Heaven on Earth Ministries International

5th Defendant

Noeltemaeli Mununa

6th Defendant

Amounts and remedies

  • Costs: 0

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Whether the Written Statement of Defense filed by the 5th and 6th defendants is defective for being verified by a person who is not a party to the defense

Party arguments

Applicant
The Written Statement of Defense filed by the 5th and 6th defendants is defective as it was verified by Gerald Gregory Likena, the plaintiff, contrary to Order VI Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33 R.E 2019.
Respondent
The 5th and 6th defendants conceded to the objection and sought leave to refile another Written Statement of Defense.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Order VI Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33 R.E 2019

    Verification of pleadings must be done by a party to the pleading.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Written Statement of Defense filed by the 5th and 6th defendants was defective as it was verified by the plaintiff, not by the defendants themselves, contravening mandatory procedural requirements.

Court disposition

objection sustained, Written Statement of Defense struck out with costs

  • Written Statement of Defense filed by the 5th and 6th defendants struck out
  • Costs awarded to the plaintiff

Source and reliance status

TANZLII · 1 January 2024

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

TANZLII

Judgment· 1 January 2024

scanned CASE NO 24149 OF 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION)

AT PAR ES SALAAM LAND CASE NO. 24149 OF 2024 GERALD GREGORY LIKENA.................................... PLAINTIFF

VERSUS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.................................... 1st DEFENDANT COMMISSIONER FOR LANDS................................................... 2ndDEFENDANT REGISTRAR OF TITLES............................................................ 3rdDEFENDANT KINONDONI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL.......................................... 4thDEFENDANT

THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE HEAVEN ON EARTH MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL..................................................5thDEFENDANT NOELTEMAELI MUNUNA..........................................6th DEFENDANT

RULING Date of Last Order: 13.11.2024 Date of Ruling: 27.11.2024 T.N, MWENEGOHA, J The Ruling is in respect of two Preliminary Objections raised by the plaintiff that, the Written Statement of Defense filed by the 5th and 6th defendants is defective for being verified by another person, one Gerald Gregory Likena who is a plaintiff herein. The counsel for the plaintiff, Mr. Andrew Miraa, insisted in his submissions that, the Written Statement of Defense filed by the 5th and 6th defendants, contravenes the mandatory provisions of Order VI Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33 i R.E 2019. The 5th and 6th defendants on their part, conceded to the objection and sought for leave of this Court to refile another Written Statement of Defence. In determining this objection, I will not take much of this Court's time, I sustain the objection raised by the counsel for the plaintiff as the 5th & 6th defendants has conceded to the same. I proceed to strike out from the records the Written Statement of Defence filed by the 5th and 6th defendants with costs. Ordered accordingly. Judge 27/11/2024 2

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Order VI Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33 R.E 2019

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.