HUSSEIN KATO RULING

HUSSEIN KATO RULING

Order IX Rule 4 is inapplicable as the hearing was not adjourned for ex parte proceedings and there are multiple defendants; Order IX Rule 8 requires the court to proceed with the hearing and issue orders at judgment regarding absent defendants; a defendant who did not appear cannot join the ongoing hearing but may seek to set aside ex parte judgment or appeal after judgment.

Citation
HUSSEIN KATO RULING
Parties
Applicant: Hussein Kato; 1st Respondent: Samwel Musa Levi (Administrator of the Estate of the Late Makoye Bungu @Mussa Levi Magwaja); 2nd Respondent: NewsMaster Corporation Ltd; 3rd Respondent: Amrani Heri Batenga; 4th Respondent: Tanzania Commercial Bank PLC; 5th Respondent: Commissioner for Lands; 6th Respondent: Registrar of Titles; 7th Respondent: Attorney General
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
29 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Order
Outcome
Application struck out as prematurely instituted.
Legal Topics
Ex Parte Proceedings, Non Appearance, Setting Aside Orders, Procedural Rules
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Ex Parte Proceedings Non Appearance Setting Aside Orders Procedural Rules

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

Hussein Kato

Applicant

Samwel Musa Levi (Administrator of the Estate of the Late Makoye Bungu @Mussa Levi Magwaja)

1st Respondent

NewsMaster Corporation Ltd

2nd Respondent

Amrani Heri Batenga

3rd Respondent

Tanzania Commercial Bank PLC

4th Respondent

Commissioner for Lands

5th Respondent

Registrar of Titles

6th Respondent

Attorney General

7th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application to set aside the order to proceed ex parte in absence of the applicant is meritorious
  2. 2 Applicability of Order IX Rule 4 and Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Code in cases with multiple defendants

Ratio Decidendi

Order IX Rule 4 is inapplicable as the hearing was not adjourned for ex parte proceedings and there are multiple defendants; Order IX Rule 8 requires the court to proceed with the hearing and issue orders at judgment regarding absent defendants; a defendant who did not appear cannot join the ongoing hearing but may seek to set aside ex parte judgment or appeal after judgment.

Court Disposition

Application struck out as prematurely instituted.

Orders

  • Application struck out
  • No order as to costs