hashimu juma napepa vs bakari ahmadi ngitu and another 2023 tzca 146 28 march 2023

hashimu juma napepa vs bakari ahmadi ngitu and another 2023 tzca 146 28 march 2023

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable ground of law or fact or matters of general importance emanating from the impugned decision; the grounds raised were hypothetical and not sufficient to warrant the exercise of the Court's discretion to grant leave to appeal.

Citation
hashimu juma napepa vs bakari ahmadi ngitu and another 2023 tzca 146 28 march 2023
Parties
Applicant: Hashimu Juma Napepe; 1st Respondent: Bakari Ahmadi Ng'itu (Administrator of the Estate of the late Galus Polipili); 2nd Respondent: MIC Tanzania Limited
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
28 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Dismissal for Default, Setting Aside Dismissal, Discretion of Court
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Leave to Appeal Dismissal for Default Setting Aside Dismissal Discretion of Court

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hashimu Juma Napepe

Applicant

Bakari Ahmadi Ng'itu (Administrator of the Estate of the late Galus Polipili)

1st Respondent

MIC Tanzania Limited

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether mishearing of the hearing date by the applicant amounts to negligence or lack of seriousness in following up the case
  2. 2 Whether mishearing or misapprehension of the hearing date constitutes sufficient reason within Order IX, Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable ground of law or fact or matters of general importance emanating from the impugned decision; the grounds raised were hypothetical and not sufficient to warrant the exercise of the Court's discretion to grant leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs.