morogoro ceramic wares ltd vs carlo and others 2006 tzhc 12 7 march 2006

morogoro ceramic wares ltd vs carlo and others 2006 tzhc 12 7 march 2006

The impugned decision is interlocutory and does not finally determine the suit; therefore, under Section 79(2) of the Civil Procedure Code, it is not subject to revision and the application is incompetent.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
morogoro ceramic wares ltd vs carlo and others 2006 tzhc 12 7 march 2006
Parties
Applicant: Morogoro Ceramic Wares Ltd (Under Receivership); Respondent: Respondents (names not specified)
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
7 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Revision / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
application struck out
Legal Topics
Revision, Jurisdiction, Interlocutory Orders
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Revision Jurisdiction Interlocutory Orders

Source-derived case record

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Morogoro Ceramic Wares Ltd (Under Receivership)

Applicant

Respondents (names not specified)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Revision / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a revision application against an interlocutory decision of the District Court that does not finally determine the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned decision is interlocutory and does not finally determine the suit; therefore, under Section 79(2) of the Civil Procedure Code, it is not subject to revision and the application is incompetent.

Court Disposition

application struck out

Orders

  • Application for revision struck out for being incompetent.
  • Respondents awarded costs.