ELIAWARA MZEE NNKO

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA [ARUSHA SUB-REGISTRY]

AT ARUSHA MISC. LAND CASE NO. 137 OF 2024 (C/F Land Application No. 185 of2020 before the District Land and Housing Tribunal ofArusha)

BETWEEN ELIAWARA MZEE NNKO.................. ........................................... Ist APPLICANT TEREVAEL MZEE NNKO................... .......................................... 2nd APPLICANT JOSHUA SIYOI NNKO................................................................. APPLICANT

VERSUS ELIAMANI NNKO........................................................................... RESPONDENT EX-PARTE RULING 14/11/2024 & 29/11/2024 MWENDA, J.: By a Chamber summons taken out under Section 38 (1) of the Land Disputes Courts Act, Cap 216 R.E 2002 and Section 14 of the Law of Limitation Act, Cap 89 R.E 2019, the 1st applicant is seeking to move this Court to extend time for her to file an appeal against the judgment and decree in Application No. 185 of 2020 before the District Land and Housing Tribunal of Arusha. The said application is supported by the affidavit sworn by the 1st applicant herself. 1 | Page Despite being served through Mwananchi Newspaper dated 25th day of September 2024 as he was nowhere to be found, the respondent never entered appearance or file counter affidavit. As such, this matter proceeded exparte against him. At the hearing of this application, the 1st Applicant appeared in person without any legal representation. Upon invitation by the court to submit in support of her application, the 1st applicant prayed this application to be disposed by way of written submission. The scheduling order was then fixed but despite being given ample time of two weeks to file the same, nothing was done by her until the ruling date. This court has gauged the 1st applicant's failure to file her written submission as per court's order only to find the same

depicting two interpretations. One that she failed to comply with the court's order and two, that such failure is equaled with being absent on the hearing date without notice. This position was stated in the case of TABITHA MARO V. RADDY FIBRE SOLUTION LIMITED, CIVIL CASE NO. 214 OF 2018, where this court ruled out as follows, that: 2 | Page "Consequences of non-compliance with the court orders in this case, filling of written submissions have two folds; first is the essence which has been equaled to a hearing, and second is non-compliance of the court orders, an abuse of court process." Also See the case of MONICA DICKSON V. HUSSEIN J. WASUHA (PC Civil Appeal 4 of 2019) [2020] TZHC 2291 (6 August 2020) (TANZLII). Based on the above authority, this court hereby rules out that the 1st applicant's failure to file written submission implies she has failed to prosecute her application, hence the said application is hereby dismissed. Since the matter was determined ex-parte, no order as to costs. It is so ordered. DATED at ARUSHA this 29th day of November 2024. 3 I Page