HAMIDU MUSHI 2222222222222 EDITED

THE JUDICIARY OF TANZANIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT MANYARA MISCELLANEOUS LAND APPLICATION NO. 000019469 OF 2024 JAMES SIMIONI LESI ANDO.................................. COMPLAINANT I APPELLANT I APPLICANT I PLAINTIFF VERSUS HAM1DU MINHAJI MUSHI................................... RESPONDENT I DEFENDANT RULING J. R. KAHYOZA, J, 2nd & 23rd September, 2024 Kahyoza, J.: Jame Simioni Lesiando (Lesiando) is seeking this Court to order Hamidu Minhaji Mus hi (As the administrator of the late Minihaji Mushi) (the respondent) in a suit, the latter instituted against Eldaima Jeremiah Ayao. He contended that he has interest in Land Case No. 01/2024. Briefly, Hamidu Minhaji Mushi (As the administrator of the late Minihaji Mushi) (the respondent) (Hamidu Minahji Mushi) instituted a suit against Eldaima Jeremiah Ayao praying among others, a declaration that he is the owner of Farm No. 2981 with Title No 22882 L.O No 267367- Orkesumet, Simanjiro District. Jame Simioni Lesiando deponed that he has interest in the suit land, which Hamidu Minahji Mushi seeks to be declared the lawful owner. He averred that he bought a portion of the land from the late Minahji Mushi. He added that joining the applicant to the suit is proper and necessary for avoidance of multiplicity of suits. The respondent filed a counter affidavit to oppose the application. He deponed that the applicant has no interest in the disputed land as the deceased did not sign the sale contract and that the respondent does not recognize the applicant’s right. The Court heard the application by way of submission. The applicant submitted as deponed in the affidavit that, he procured part of the disputed land from the late Minahji Mushi. For that reason, he has an interest in the suit. To support his contention, he cited the case of Equity Bank Tanzania Ltd and Equity Bank Kenya Ltd v StateOil Tanzania limited. Civ. Appeal No. 294/ 2022. The respondent submitted in opposition that parties are bound by pleadings. He cited the case of Bank (T) Ltd vs. Jacob Muro (Civil Appeal No. 357 of 2019. He added that submission is not evidence and cited the case of Rosemary Stella Chambejairo vs David Kitundu Jairo (Civil Reference 6 of 2018) |2021| TZCA 442 (2 September 2021). 1 have reviewed the applicant's averment and the submissions, it is obvious that the applicant has established a prima facie case that he has interest in the suit land. The applicant alleged that he bought a portion of the suit land, which the respondent seeks to be declared the lawful owner. Order I rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code. |Cap. 33 R.E. 20219| provides that- “3. All persons may be joined as defendants against whom any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same act or transaction or series of acts or transactions is alleged to exist, whether jointly, severally or in the alternative where, if separate suits were brought against such persons, any common question of law or fact would arise.” Given the averment in the affidavit and the respondent’s claim in the suit before court, I am of the firm opinion that if separate suits were brought against, common question of law or fact would arise. For that reason. I find that the applicant has established that he has interest in the suit and to avoid multiplicity of suits, I allow the applicant's application and order the respondent to amend the plaint and join the applicant as a second defendant. Costs shall follow event in the main suit. Court: Ruling delivered in the presence of Mr. Mganga Paul, advocate for the Respondent/Plaintiff and Mr. Shangali advocate holding Mr. Bashir Maiya for Applicant. B/C. Ms. Fatina (RMA) present. John R. Kahyoza Judge 23. 9. 2024 Dated at MANYARA ZONE this 23rd of September 2024. .1. R. KAHYOZAJ .JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT