maulid hassan vs juma r mkambala another 2018 tzhclandd 469 27 august 2018

maulid hassan vs juma r mkambala another 2018 tzhclandd 469 27 august 2018

The application was incompetent because it was brought under the wrong legal provision; the proper provision is Section 41(2) of the Land Disputes Courts Act, not Section 14(1) of the Law of Limitation Act.

Citation
maulid hassan vs juma r mkambala another 2018 tzhclandd 469 27 august 2018
Parties
Applicant: Maulid Hassan; 1st Respondent: Juma R. Mkambala; 2nd Respondent: Toba Abdallah Sebo
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
27 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Misc. Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection Regarding Competence of Application
Outcome
Application struck out as incompetent
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Jurisdiction, Proper Citation of Law
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Extension of Time Jurisdiction Proper Citation of Law

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maulid Hassan

Applicant

Juma R. Mkambala

1st Respondent

Toba Abdallah Sebo

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Misc. Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection Regarding Competence of Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for extension of time was properly filed under the correct legal provision

Ratio Decidendi

The application was incompetent because it was brought under the wrong legal provision; the proper provision is Section 41(2) of the Land Disputes Courts Act, not Section 14(1) of the Law of Limitation Act.

Court Disposition

Application struck out as incompetent

Orders

  • Misc. Land Application No. 657 of 2016 is struck out
  • No order as to costs