19780221 TZHC Bukoba
The appellant's failure to provide a valid address or pursue the appeal demonstrates lack of interest, justifying dismissal for want of prosecution.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19780221 TZHC Bukoba
- Parties
- Appellant: Musa Omari; Respondent: Felicitas Nicholas
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 21 February 1978
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Service of Process, Appeals
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Musa Omari
Appellant
Felicitas Nicholas
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to appellant's failure to appear and provide address
- 2 Whether lack of provision for substituted service affects dismissal
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant's failure to provide a valid address or pursue the appeal demonstrates lack of interest, justifying dismissal for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- The respondent will have her costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R C- L5 OL v - - IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA t11 011unnh (PC) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 135 OF 1975 (From the decision of the district court t.f. Bukoba at Bukoba in Civil Appeal No. 245 of 1974 - Before A.N. Russeta,, Esq., D.M. Original Ibwera Primary Court Civil Case 51/74) MUSA OMARI : : : : : : : :. : : : APPELLANT versus FELICITAS NICHOLAS :. : : : : RESPONDENT RU L I N G SISYA, J.: This is an application by the respondent to have this appeal dismissed for want of prosecution. The appellant filed his appealbn 24/3/75. Since then hearing and determination thereof have been put off several times simply because notices of date of hearing addressed to the appellant have been returned unserved on the ground that the appellant was not at the given address. This has been so to date. On the other hand on the occasions the respondent was served with notice of hearing she did turn up. On one occasion she failed to turn up. Nevertheless she took pains to write the Court and pointed out that she failed to turn up because she was admitted at Kagondo hospital where she subsequently underwent an operation. She did not produce any medical certificates but to my mind this gesture speaks very well of her good intentions. Unlike the appellant who has not even bothered to find out the results of his appeal let alone provide the court with his new address. Unfortunately there is no provision for substituted service in respect of notices of hearing on appeal. This is unfortuhate as it can be very frustrating to,a respondent who is keen to finalise the matter against him/her while at the same time it gives an appellant with bad intentions opportunity to keep the matter pending indefinetely. In all the circumstances of this case I think it will not be fair to continue adjourning this matter. If the appellant was keen to see this matter through he certainly would have contcted this Court. His failure to do so, to me, means that he is no longer interested in pursuing this appeal. At any rate if I may be permitted to say so, the appeal itself to this court (as was that to the District Court as well) founded directly on an exparte judgement of the trial court is manifestly incompetent. In the final result this, appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. The respondent will have her costs. Read in the presence of the respondent at Bukoba this 21st February, 1978. 1/). H.E.D. SI(A, JUDGE.