mtawasitu yusufu vs chama cha ushirika cha kilimo hai na soko la haki kikamabu 2024 tzhc 507 23 february 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (IN THE DISTRICT REGISTRY OF BUKOBA) AT BUKOBA LABOUR REVISION NO. 9 OF 2023 (Arising from the Commission for Mediation and Arbitration at Bukoba in Labour Dispute No. CMA/KA G/BUK/20/2023) MTAWASITU YUSUFU ............... ................................. . APPLICANT VERSUS CHAMA CHA USHIRIKA CHA KILIMO HAI NA SOKO LA HAKIKIKAMABU REG. No. KAR.867 ..................... RESPONDENT RULING 20th February & 23rd March 2024 A.Y. Mwenda, J < This ruling emanates from the application made by the applicant Mr. Mtawasitu Yusufu- The applicant filed this application under Rule 24(1), (2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), 24(3), (a), (b), (c), 28(1), (b), (c), (d), (e), 28(2) of the Labour Court Rules G.N NO. 106 of 2007, sections 91 (1) (a), 91(2) (b), (c) and 94 (1) (b) (i) of the Employment and Labour Relation Act. It is supported by the applicant's affidavit and in counter thereof the respondent filed counter affidavit accompanied with preliminary points of objection. The said points of law are as follows that; I) The application is irredeemably incurably defective and un maintainable at law for want of a chamber summons. ii) The application is incompetent for being filed out of time without seeking and obtaining leave of this court At the hearing of this revision the applicant was represented by Mr. Aderick Runyoro learned counsel while Mr. Cleophas Rugemalira appeared as respondent's secretary. When parties were invited to submit in respect of preliminary points of objection, the learned counsel for the applicant conceded to the said points of objections. He however prayed this application to be struck out without costs. On his part Mr. Rugemalira had no objection with the prayer by the learned counsel for the applicant. That being the case, since the learned counsel for the applicant conceded on the preliminary point of objection one of which being on the time limitation, then this court is of the view that this application should be dismissed. This is provided so under section 3(1) of the Law of Limitation Act [CAP 89 R.E 2019] said section reads as follows; "Subject to the provisions of this Act, every proceeding described in the first column of the schedule to this Act and which is instituted after the period of limitation prescribed thereof opposite thereto in the second column, shall be dismissed whether or not limitation has been set up as a defence." 2 Guided by the above position of law since the application has been filed out of time and the only remedy available is dismissal, this application is hereby dismissed without costs. It is so ordered. 23.02.2024 Ruling delivered in chamber under the seal of this court in the presence of Mr. Aderick Runyoro learned counsel for the applicant and in presence of Mr. Frank 3