maimuna abdallah mpanda vs tanzania postal bank limited and another 2021 tzhclandd 55 15 march 2021

maimuna abdallah mpanda vs tanzania postal bank limited and another 2021 tzhclandd 55 15 march 2021

The applicant failed to provide credible and consistent reasons for the delay. The evidence presented was contradictory and did not establish sufficient cause for extension of time. The court found the applicant's explanation unmeritorious and dismissed the application.

Citation
maimuna abdallah mpanda vs tanzania postal bank limited and another 2021 tzhclandd 55 15 march 2021
Parties
Applicant: Maimuna Abdallah Mpanda; 1st Respondent: Tanzania Postal Bank Limited; 2nd Respondent: Harvest (T) Limited
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
15 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals, Delay Justification
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Delay Justification

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 1 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maimuna Abdallah Mpanda

Applicant

Tanzania Postal Bank Limited

1st Respondent

Harvest (T) Limited

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause for extension of time to file an appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide credible and consistent reasons for the delay. The evidence presented was contradictory and did not establish sufficient cause for extension of time. The court found the applicant's explanation unmeritorious and dismissed the application.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for extension of time is dismissed with costs