happiness simon ndeki versus international commercial bank t ltd 3 others 2023 tzhclandd 17222 26 october 2023

happiness simon ndeki versus international commercial bank t ltd 3 others 2023 tzhclandd 17222 26 october 2023

The applicant demonstrated the existence of a prima facie case, risk of irreparable loss, and that the balance of convenience favors her. The court found that denying the injunction would cause her greater hardship than the respondents, justifying the grant of the injunction.

Citation
happiness simon ndeki versus international commercial bank t ltd 3 others 2023 tzhclandd 17222 26 october 2023
Parties
Applicant: Happiness Simon Ndeki; 1st Respondent: International Commercial Bank (T) Ltd; 2nd Respondent: Mbuzax Auction Mart and Company Ltd; 3rd Respondent: N and 3 Investment Limited; 4th Respondent: Joseph James Mgana
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
26 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Injunction Pending Determination of Main Suit
Outcome
Application allowed
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunction, Mortgage Dispute, Matrimonial Property, Irreparable Harm
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Interlocutory Injunction Mortgage Dispute Matrimonial Property Irreparable Harm

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Happiness Simon Ndeki

Applicant

International Commercial Bank (T) Ltd

1st Respondent

Mbuzax Auction Mart and Company Ltd

2nd Respondent

N and 3 Investment Limited

3rd Respondent

Joseph James Mgana

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Injunction Pending Determination of Main Suit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the respondents from evicting or disturbing her use of the suit properties pending determination of the main suit

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant demonstrated the existence of a prima facie case, risk of irreparable loss, and that the balance of convenience favors her. The court found that denying the injunction would cause her greater hardship than the respondents, justifying the grant of the injunction.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

  • Respondents and any person acting under their instructions are restrained from evicting, stopping, or disturbing the applicant from the use of the specified properties pending determination of the main suit.
  • Order as to costs.