JAMES KHATIBU 222 Edit
The appeal was filed out of time and is incompetent; additionally, the appellant's absence justified dismissal for want of prosecution.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- JAMES KHATIBU 222 Edit
- Parties
- Appellant: James Khatibu; Respondent: Ismail Ramadhani Kilala
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 14 November 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Appeal, Limitation of Time, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- 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
James Khatibu
Appellant
Ismail Ramadhani Kilala
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal was filed within the statutory time limit
- 2 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was filed out of time and is incompetent; additionally, the appellant's absence justified dismissal for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- appeal dismissed for being time barred and for want of prosecution
- costs awarded to respondent
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA SUB-REGISTRY OF MANYARA AT BABATI PC CIVIL APPEAL NO. 23107 OF 2024 (Arising from Civil Appeal No. 2/2024 of Kiteto District Court, Originating from Civil Case No. 39 of2023 from Kibaya Primary Court) JAMES KHATIBU....................................................... APPELLANT VERSUS ISMAIL RAMADHANI KI LA LA............................................... RESPONDENT RULING 14h & 14/ November, 2024 Kahyoza, J. The first appellate court record depicts that the judgment was delivered on 14th August, 2024 and the appellant lodged the appeal on 17.09.2024. section 25(b) of the Magistrates Court Act provides that, a person aggrieved by the decision of the district court when exercising its appellate jurisdiction shall appeal within thirty days. It reads- "25. -(1) sa ve as hereinafter provide- (a) in proceedings of a criminal nature,... (b) in any other proceedings any party, if aggrieved by the decision or order of a district court in the exercise of its appellate or revisional jurisdiction may, within thirty days after the date of the decision or order, appeal there from to i the High Court; and the High Court may extend the time for filing an appeal either before or after such period of thirty days has expired." The appellant was obliged to lodge the appeal within 30 days from the date of the judgment. Thirty days expired on 13.9.2024 and the appeal was lodged on 17.09.2024. it is now settled that the date of filing the matter to court, if the filing is subject to payment of fees, is the date when the control number was issued. I find that the appellant filed the appeal out of time. The appeal is incompetent and I proceed to dismiss it with costs for being filed out of time. Even if the appeal was filed on time, which is not, the fact that the appellant is absent and he is the one who served the respondent with the summons to appear today for hearing, the appeal would have been dismissed for want of prosecution. In the end, I dismiss the appeal for being both time barred and for want of prosecution with costs. I order accordingly. Dated at Babati this 14th day of November, 2024. John R. Kahyoza Judge 2 Court: Ruling delivered in the absence of the appellant and in the presence of the appellant and in the presence of the respondent. B/C. Mr. Shadrack (RMA) present. John R. Kahyoza Judge 14. 11. 2024 3