johansen bishota lwekamwa vs tanzania zambia railways authority 2020 tzhclandd 3976 27 november 2020
The application was struck out as incompetent because it was brought under the wrong provision of law, and the court was not properly moved.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- johansen bishota lwekamwa vs tanzania zambia railways authority 2020 tzhclandd 3976 27 november 2020
- Parties
- Applicant: Johansen Bishota Lwekamwa; Respondent: Tanzania Zambia Railways Authority
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 27 November 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- Application struck out as incompetent
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Proper Citation of Legal Provisions, Competence of Application
- 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
Johansen Bishota Lwekamwa
Applicant
Tanzania Zambia Railways Authority
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for extension of time was brought under the correct legal provision
- 2 Whether the application is competent before the court
Ratio Decidendi
The application was struck out as incompetent because it was brought under the wrong provision of law, and the court was not properly moved.
Court Disposition
Application struck out as incompetent
Orders
- Application struck out
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION) AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO. 41 OF 2020 JOHANSEN BISHOTA LWEKAMWA................................................... APPLICANT VERSUS TANZANIA ZAMBIA RAILWAYS AUTHORITY............................... RESPONDENT Date ofJudgment27/11/2020 Date of the last order.28/9/2020 RULING I. MAIGE, J This is an application for extension of time to appeal against the judgment and decree of the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Temeke in 24 of 2016. The application is made under Order XIV Rule 1,2 and 7 of the First Schedule of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap. 33, R.E, 2002. It is supported by the affidavit deposed by the applicant. Apart from the counter affidavit deposed on her behalf by Mercy Chimtawi, learned advocate, the respondent filed a notice of preliminary objection to the effect that the application has been brought under a wrong provision of law and is supported by a defective affidavit. In her brief but precise written i submissions, Miss. Chimtawi informed the Court that the cited provisions under the CPC are incapable of moving the Court for extension of time to appeal. In her view, which sounds to be correct, the appropriate provision would have been section 14(1) of the Law of Limitation Act, Cap. 89, R.E., 2019. She therefore prayed that the application be struck out for being incompetent. There was no useful submissions in rebuttal from the respondent who appeared in person. On my part, I am in agreement with the respondent and her counsel that the cited provisions from CPC has nothing to do with an application for extension of time to appeal against a judgment of the District Land and Housing Tribunal. In the circumstance therefore, the Court has not been properly moved. Consequently, the application is struck out for being incompetent. I will in the circumstance to give an order as to costs. It is so ordered. I. Maige JUDGE 27/11/2020 2 Date: 27/11/2020 Coram: Hon. S.H. Simfukwe - DR For the Applicant: Present in person For the Respondent: Absent RMA: Bukuku ORDER: Ruling delivered this 27th day of November, 2020. S.H. Simfukwe DEPUTY REGISTRAR 27/11/2020 3