mb business limited vs amos david kasanda others 2023 tzca 17405 13 july 2023

mb business limited vs amos david kasanda others 2023 tzca 17405 13 july 2023

The applicant was denied the right to be heard in the High Court proceedings, which is a fundamental constitutional and natural justice violation. The High Court also lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as the revocation was by the President, not the Registrar of Titles. The proceedings, judgment, and decree are nullified.

Citation
mb business limited vs amos david kasanda others 2023 tzca 17405 13 july 2023
Parties
Applicant: M. B. Business Limited; 1st Respondent: Amos David Kasanda; 2nd Respondent: Commissioner for Lands; 3rd Respondent: Attorney General
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
13 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Application for Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision
Outcome
Application allowed to the extent stated; High Court proceedings, ex parte judgment, and decree quashed and set aside; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Right to Be Heard, Natural Justice, Jurisdiction, Ex Parte Proceedings, Revocation of Title, Judicial Review
Source Language
English
Land Law Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Right to Be Heard Natural Justice Jurisdiction Ex Parte Proceedings Revocation of Title +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. B. Business Limited

Applicant

Amos David Kasanda

1st Respondent

Commissioner for Lands

2nd Respondent

Attorney General

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application for Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was denied the right to be heard in the High Court appeal
  2. 2 Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the revocation of title by the President
  3. 3 Whether the High Court proceedings and ex parte judgment were proper

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was denied the right to be heard in the High Court proceedings, which is a fundamental constitutional and natural justice violation. The High Court also lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as the revocation was by the President, not the Registrar of Titles. The proceedings, judgment, and decree are nullified.

Court Disposition

Application allowed to the extent stated; High Court proceedings, ex parte judgment, and decree quashed and set aside; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Proceedings of the High Court quashed
  • Ex parte judgment and decree set aside