N
- Citation
- N
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 1 January 1994
- Posture
- Civil Appeal / Chamber Application
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 1 January 1994
- Posture
- Civil Appeal / Chamber Application
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The application was incompetent as the applicant was not a party to the appeal and could not file an application in the appeal file.
Court disposition
application struck out
Orders
- application struck off the register
02
Material facts
Parties
Kiza s/o Ibichiru
AppellantMichael Lingi
RespondentRuman s/o Ikotiko
Applicant03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Appeal / Chamber Application
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicant was entitled to file a chamber application for stay of execution in the appeal file
- 02
Whether the applicant was a party to the appeal
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Applicant sought a stay of execution of an eviction order issued by the District Court.
- Respondent
- Respondent opposed the application on grounds that the applicant was not a party to the appeal.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Civil procedure rules
Only parties to the appeal may file applications in the appeal file.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The application was incompetent as the applicant was not a party to the appeal and could not file an application in the appeal file.
Court disposition
application struck out
- application struck off the register
Source and reliance status
TZHC · 1 January 1994
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TZHC
Judgment· 1 January 1994
D" TIDJ RIGII CO'(faT · OF T.,.:.NZi.NL'. .4.T .. DODQ1,w. (DC) .CIVIL 2p:·:;..1 NO. 10 OF 1994 (F:r-oo tho decision of tJ.'.a Dist-rict CoUi,t of Dod.om~. ,'".::: J)t,r: c'.rn.~·. in Civil ,C2,so no. 16 of 1994 versus J','IICIL'.EL lLlNGII a•,.",.. o .,:J.DS'PmID::J:NT ll L I ---G Jo I r;.1)PClJ.Z"n b Kizc. s/ o Ib:: d1ir.1u in tt.is c,:;;:voc.l, he.cl his 2.ppoal clisDissoc on 10/Y1994c. 'lYen r_ Rtrn:n.:_;n:1: '-,., :.,ci~ :-~.1,"" __ ., ,.~, T',:,~Jrl s/o :ikotiko hc-,r filed ,:::, chcnbor -:,:.-:: lic,:'-_tion · in tho en.so fi1o of r,1,poal, prairinc for r:. s·:: ,: o:f m:::ocution o:i: en eviction o:cd.o:c issuod. 1jy th, TI,vlo:·,,,, 0 District Court4 'r.:. . :, ::,:Jl)lication is nisoonodv-cd. 2.ncl inoor:r.l!otont, 11s it co..nnot "be filoc;_ J,ll L:: ]Oc,i i}2.GC· filo., 'E:o c-;;_:;·:licrn1; was not 3, po..:rty to tho c..11i;ocl filec, lY Kiz2, s/o roI' cl1ir1u~ m::.c,t tb..e appiicmt should l:c,vc clon0 ,ms to file tho <1.c.:.) :ir 2.:::: lied ion d Doclor.m District Court 1i101,o tho jn the caso filo of a:ppoal concorninc Kizc, /o Ib.,:c.hiL1u. tmcl inoom}?Otdllt -,; 1d so it is stxuok off tl1e :J.ocistor., O:cd02 c..ocoiclincly,. ... ---·- -·· .• •f
J LL /
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.