kuza africa co ltd vs adelaide global limited 2022 tzhccomd 234 25 august 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) AT DAR-ES-SALAAM MISC.COMMERCIAL CASE NO. 120 OF 2021 (Arising from Commercial Case No.100 of 2021) KUZA AFRICA COMPANY LIMITED...........................APPLICANT VERSUS ADELAIDE GLOBAL LIMITED...............................RESPONDENT RULING Last Order: 25/8/2022 Date of ruling 25/8/22 NANGELA, J.: This application was filed under Order XXV Rule (1) (1) of the Civil Procedure Code, R.E 2019. It was made by way of a chamber summons supported by an affidavit of one Boniface Mwabukusi, learned Advocate for the Applicant, seeking for the following order: 1. That, this Honourable Court be pleased to issue an Order to the Respondent herein, who is also the Plaintiff in Commercial Case No.100 of 2021 Page 1 of 4 pending in this Court, to deposit in this Court the costs of this Application mandatorily required by law. 2. That, the Respondent bears the costs of this application. 3. Any other relief(s) that this Court deems fit and just to grant. On the 25th day of August 2022, the parties appeared before me for necessary orders. The Applicant enjoyed the services of Mr Boniface Mwabukusi, while Ms Winjaneth Lema, learned advocate as well, appeared for the Respondent. When addressing this Court, Mr Mwabukusi informed the it that, the parties are in an amicable and agreed position that, the main case upon which this application is premised be withdrawn from the Court to allow them to pursue a different agreed mode of settling their differences. In view of that, he prayed for leave to withdraw the matter from this Court but with leave to re-file it should the main case be re-filed by the Respondent (Plaintiff). Page 2 of 4 For her part, Ms. Lema supported the prayer, noting that, indeed, the parties are on an agreement that, the main case be withdrawn from the Court with leave to re-file it should such a need arise. Ms Lema told the Court, therefore, that, the Respondent does not object to the prayers sought by the learned counsel for the Applicant and did not press for costs. Given the underlying developments as narrated herein above, and, since Ms Lema does not objection or press for costs, this Court settles for the following orders: 1. That, the prayer by the Applicant’s counsel is hereby granted and this Misc. Commercial Application No.120 of 2021 is hereby “marked withdrawn from the Court” at the instance of the Applicant’s counsel and with leave to re-file it should there be such a need, subject to other provisions of the law. Page 3 of 4 2. That, the withdrawal of this application from the Court is with no orders as to costs. It is so ordered. DATED AT DAR-ES-SALAAM ON THIS 25 TH AUGUST 2022 ..... ................................... DEO JOHN NANGELA JUDGE Page 4 of 4