mm intergrated steel mills ltd vs auto mech ltd and others 2020 tzhc 1327 26 june 2020

mm intergrated steel mills ltd vs auto mech ltd and others 2020 tzhc 1327 26 june 2020

The applicant failed to prove that the respondents were about to dispose of the property with the intention to obstruct or delay execution of a decree, as the only evidence showed TIB Development Bank Limited was the party intending to sell due to loan default, not the respondents. The applicant also failed to prove non-payment and that the respondents had no other attachable property. Thus, the conditions for attachment before judgment were not met.

Citation
mm intergrated steel mills ltd vs auto mech ltd and others 2020 tzhc 1327 26 june 2020
Parties
Applicant: M.M. Intergrated Steel Mills Limited; 1st Respondent: Auto Mech Limited; 2nd Respondent: Heena Patel; 3rd Respondent: Ramesh Patel
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
26 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Attachment Before Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Attachment Before Judgment, Execution of Decrees, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Attachment Before Judgment Execution of Decrees Burden of Proof

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M.M. Intergrated Steel Mills Limited

Applicant

Auto Mech Limited

1st Respondent

Heena Patel

2nd Respondent

Ramesh Patel

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Attachment Before Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for attachment before judgment under Order XXXVI Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code
  2. 2 Whether the respondents are about to dispose of property with intent to obstruct or delay execution of a decree

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to prove that the respondents were about to dispose of the property with the intention to obstruct or delay execution of a decree, as the only evidence showed TIB Development Bank Limited was the party intending to sell due to loan default, not the respondents. The applicant also failed to prove non-payment and that the respondents had no other attachable property. Thus, the conditions for attachment before judgment were not met.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for attachment before judgment is dismissed with costs