Misc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

LAND DIVISION

AT PAR ES SALAAM MISCELLANEOUS LAND APPLICATION NO 26617 OF 2024 (Originating from Land Case No 26425 of2024) KESSYNURU TAJIRI.......................................................... APPLICANT

VERSUS PPF SACCOS LIMITED........................................... 1st RESPONDENT YONO AUCTION MART & COMPANY LTD................ 2nd RESPONDENT

RULING Date of last Order: 24/10/2024 Date of Ruling: 24/10/2024 LALTAIKA, J. The Applicant herein KESSYNURU TAJIRI has moved this Court under Order XXXVII Rule 1(a) and 2(1) and sections 68(c) and (e) as well as section 95 of the Civil Procedure Code Cap 33 R.E. 2019 seeking for the following orders: 1 (1) A temporary injunction restraining the Respondents, her agents, workers or servants from sa/e and/or disposing off in any manner the two houses situated at Mikocheni area in Kinondoni Municipality Dar-es-Salaam identified by Title No. B7868 Plot 1017 Block F and Tide No. 1862/168Plot 3 & 3A Block 41 Kinondoni Area pending the hearing and final determination of the main Application. (2) The cost of this Application be provided for. (3) Any other relief the court may deem fit to grant. When the Application was called for hearing on the 24th of October 2024, the Applicant appeared in person, unrepresented. The Respondents, on the other hand, enjoyed the legal services of Mr. Paulo Mtui, learned Advocate accompanied with Ms. Witness Pallangyo, Hamisi Mkangamo, and George Buhatwa (Officers of the 1st Respondent) The Applicant informed the court that the application was coming for hearing and that the same was of extreme urgency because of the eminent danger of the property of her own being sought to be auctioned by the Respondents. She hoped the Application would be granted

pending hearing and final determination of the main suit namely Land Case No 26425 of 2024 pending in this Chamber. 2 Mr. Mtui, on his part, appeared relaxed. He informed the court that he had no intention of objecting to the Application. He prayed that as the temporary injunction is granted, parties proceed with the necessary steps to speed up determination of the main suit. He intimated that he had raised a point of preliminary objection PO and was fortified that the same could determine the fate of the suit on the first day the PO is heard on merit. This is probably why he appeared relaxed. I have considered the concurrent submissions by both parties. In our jurisdiction, the legal framework for temporary injunctions is primarily governed by the Civil Procedure Code (Supra), specifically under Order XXXVII. It is a court order aimed at maintaining the status quo between parties involved in a dispute until the court reaches a final decision. The main goal of a temporary injunction in our jurisdiction as it is, I believe in many if not most other legal systems around the world, is to prevent irreparable harm, damage, or injustice that could occur if one party is allowed to act in a way that affects the subject matter of the dispute before the court has had a chance to decide on the matter. 3 A detailed examination of the requirements for granting a temporary injunction as laid

down in several cases in irrelevant in the present application because the Respondent has not objected the same. In the upshot, the Application for a temporary injunction pending final determination of Land Case Number 26425 OF 2024 pending in this Court is hereby granted. Each party to bear their own cost. It is so ordered. C0U/?> E I. LA LTAl KA Court: This Ruling is delivered this 27th day of August 2024 in the presence of Mr. Paulo Mtui, learned Advocate for the Respondents, the Applicant who has appeared in person. 4