national bank of commerce vs justo msechu sons ltd 1997 tzca 59 24 june 1997

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA at dau r;s salaam AU CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2 OF 199V BETWEEN NATIONAL HANK OF COMMERCE................ APPLICANT AND JUSTO MSECHU & SONS LTD.................... RESPONDENT ( A p p l i c a t i o n from the JuHgement o f the lliph Court o f Tanzania s t Arusha) ( Hroso, J. ) dated the 24 th day o f December, 19‘J(-> i n t - l v i l Case No. 40 o f 1995 R ij I. I N G L U n » V / \ , J . A . ; In t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n , the a p p l i c a n t , the N a t i o n a l Bank of Commerce i s seeking to stay the e x ec u t i o n o f th'ft de cr ee dated 24th December, 199S pending the intended appeal . The decr ee was i ssued by the High Court at Arusha (Mroso, J . ) in C i v i l Case No. 40 o f 1995. In that ca se , the Respondent was awarded s p e c i f i damages a t a cum of s h i l l i n g s 26,240,000/=. Being d i s s a t i s f i e d wi th the d e c i s i o n the a pp l i c a n t has lodged a n o t i c e o f - a p p e a l . The a p p l i c a t i o n by way o f a n o t i c e o f motion supported by an a f f i d a v i t sworn by W i l f r e d Mirambo, learned Counsel who t o g e t h e r w i th Hr. Maira, learned Counsel had r ep r e s e n t e d the applicant before the High Court. From the a f f i d a v i t the main ground f o r se ek i ng stay o f e x e c u t i o n I s t hat tho a p p l i c a n t would s u f f e r g r e a t hardship i f an o r d e r f o r s t ay o f e x ec u t i o n i s not g r a n t e d . Furthermore, it is a lso st a t ed in the a f f i d a v i t t h a t the inteVided appeal has g r e a t chances o f success. At the h e ar i ng o f t h i s a p pl i c a t i o n b e f o r e me, the a p p l i c a n t was again advocated I: o r hy Mer.r.rs M o i r a and Mi rnmho, loarnod Counsel. In elaboration, K*iiraf loarmM Counsel emphasized the fact that as t.h<? r('5|)on.-|t:r’ t: company l a ' l o r mar t w i t h no r e t u r n f i li?d since 1W7 , the a p p l i c a n t is likely to s u f f e r 1 i r r e p a ra b l e l o s s if the appe a 1 .succeed;-; i n l i i s f a v o u r . This i s so, tie s t a t e d , Iwcauso the rcsilond.'.'Pt i s so h e a v i l y indebted to the a p p l i c a n t bonk that it would n o t ho p o s s i b l e for the a p p l i c a n t to r e c o v e r the d e c r e t a l amount once e x e c u t i o n takes p l a c e . In the c o u r s e o f his submission, Mr. M.-jii'o ievu,i.L<"l that the d e c r e t a l amount o l slii.1 l i n y s 2(i, 1-Mi1, ! " ’ 0' - has been pa i d under p r o t e s t a l t e r the s e i z u r e and a t ta c h me nt o f tin.-; applicant's mo t or v e h i c l e s . Prompted by the Co u r t as t o what the application seeks to a chi eve i f e x e cu t i o n has been e f f e c t e d , Mr.Mairq, lear ned Counsel whi le conceding and c o r r e c t l y so in my considered vi e w t hat wi th the d e c r e t a l amount pai d the a p p l i c a t i o n f o r stay o f e x e c u t i o n had been over taken by e v e n t s , he urged the c o u r t to issue; an o r d e r f o r the respondent t o d e p o s i t the amount o f money in Couri:. In h i s submission, Mr. Maira was o f the vi ew t hat i t wni; s a f e r t o hove the money de po s i t ed in Court than l e a v i n g i t in the custody o f the respondent. He submitted f u r t h e r that the Court could do no by i nv oki ng r ul e 3 of the C o u r t ' s r u l e s in o r de r t o ensure that j u s t i c e i s 'done. Mr. n. Nqalo, l earned Counsel f o r the respondent vehementaly opposed the a p p l i c a t i o n . Me a v a i l e d t o the Court a copy o f the l e t t e r from tlii.- a p p l i c a n t dated 29th May, 1997 addressed t o the Respondent e n c l o s i n g a cheque f o r s h i l l i n g s 26,240,000/=. ; I t wa.« Mr. K g a l o * s vli-w that i n terms o f the p r o v i s i o n s o f r ul e 0 (2) the i n s t i t u t i o n o f an appeal s h a l l not o p e r at e t o suspend the e x e cu t i o n o f a decree1. I n t h i s ca se , the e x ec u t i on having taken place, t her e was no b a s i s f o r s us t ai ni ng the a p p l i c a t i o n f o r stay, »•> he urged. Elaborating further, Mr. Ngalo submitted t h a t as a mat t er of' p r i n c i p l e , no st ay ol e x ec u t i on o r d e r can be issued a f t e r e x e c u t i o n lias teen c a r r i c d out. In support of this proposition, he r e f e r r e d to MH1.LA on C i v i l I’ rocedu re Coda, 14th Edition, Vol. p. 1180. He prayed f o r the d i s m i s s a l o f the application. ♦ From the: a f f i d a v i t d e p o s i t i o n by the a p p l i c a n t and the oral submissions by both the learned Counsel f o r each o f the pnrti.es, it i s common ground t ha t s h i l l i n g s 26,240,000/= has been paid by t he" a p p l i c a n t i n s a t i s f a c t i o n o f the d e c r e e i n r e s p e c t o f the Hi gh; Cou r t (Arusha) C i v i l Case No. 40 o f 1995. In the l e t t e r of 29.5;. 1997 addressed by the A p p l i c a n t ' s Zonal D i r e c t o r to the Respondent, it is stated: " Encl osed herewi t h p l e a s e f i n d our - BP cheque No. A 050862 f o r Shs. 26,240,000/= being payment in • s a t is fa c t io n of the de cr ee in respect of the above c a se . We f t h e r e f o r e expect t ha t the bank' s ,:v t hr ee v e h i c l e s att ached by the Court Broker in e x ec u t i o n o f the decree w i l l he r e l e a s e d i m m e d i a t e l y " . T h e ' n o t i c e o f motion f i l e d under r u l e 9 ( 2 ) (b) 'o f the Court o f Appeal Ru l es , 1979 seeks the C o u r t ' s o r d e r i n these terms: '■* '• ii " Th a t the e x ecu t ion o f d e c r ee i n High Court C i v i l Cose No. 40/1995 d e l i v e r e d at Arusha on 24/12/1996 : be stayed u n t i l the d e t e r mi n a t i o n v o-f- the intended appeal to the Court o f Appeal o f Ta nz ani a" . .../4 •/ 2 From these 1ne t s and os a ! r e a d y i n d i c a t e d , Counsel f o r both . p a r t i e s are eyrned) it i s beyond di s pu t e t ha t what was souqht to bS achieved in the a p p l i c a t i o n f o r s t a y has a l r e a dy been accomplished. That i s , as Mr. Moira, l e a r ne d Counsel f o r the a pp l i c an t de sc ri be d i t , the | stage f o r stay orriivr i s o v e r . In Mulla, C i v i l Procedure Code, 10 th * Edition. p .ll»0. it is stated: * "An o r d e r f o r a s t a y o f e x e c u t i on i mpl i e s t h at the: d e c r e e has not been executed. Therefore, whero a de cr ee has been executed, no o r d e r can be made un^er t.hir. r u l e . " And so, as c o r r e c t l y conceded by the learned Counsel f o r both parties, t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n has been ov er take n by e v en t s. There i:; h a r d l y anything t h a t t hi s Court could do at t h i s stage in t h i s application i r r e s t o r i n g the st at u s quo which i s the o b j e c t o f such on a p p l i c a t i o n . The g r a n t i n g o f a stay o r de r would not t h e r e f o r e ser ve any u s e f u l purpose. At t h i s j u n c t ur e i t i n r e l e v a n t to observe t ha t the a p p l i c a t i o n by way o f a n o t i c e o f motion was f i l e d in the Court a t the Arusha R e g i s t r y way back on 3rd January, 1997. T h i s was r ea s on ab l y soon a f t e r the de c r ee was d e l i v e r e d on 24.12.1996. However, i t i s u n f or t un at e t hat w hi l e the a p p l i c a t i o n was s t i l l pending, a warrant o f attachment was issued on 9,5.1997 r e s u l t i n g i n the attachment o f the a p p l i c a n t ' s motor v e h i c l e s . Although as a matter o f law under the p r o v i s i o n s o f rule 9 (2) that co ur se o f a c t i o n cannot be f a u l t e d because the i n s t i t u t i o n o f an appeal i s not a ground f o r suspending the execution o f a d e c r e e , n o n e t h e l e ss , if the f a c t t hat the a p p l i c a t i o n was al re ady b e f o r e the Court was brought to the a t t e n t i o n of the High Court, it could w e l l he c o n s i d e r ed b e f o r e the issuance o f the e x ec u t i o n o r d e r . *£' In'the overt o f n refusal to s t a y the e x e c u t i o n o f the' .decree, it would bo open f o r the p a r t y a g g r i ev e d to appeal a ga i n s t that decision. As mat t er s stari^ now, opar t from sympathi zing with the applicant, a:> a mat ter o f law and procedure, t h i s Court has no l e g a l bo ni s upon which t o isnue a stay o r de r. As mentioned b e f o r e , Mr. Maira, lear ned Counsel f o r the a p p l i c a n t made strenuous e f f o r t to convi nce the Court to invoke r ul e 3 o f the C o u r t ' s Rules, 1979 to o r de r the Respondent to d e p o s i t i n c o u r t the money paid by the a p p l i c a n t irj s a t i s f a c t i o n of the d e c r e e i . e . Shs. 26,240,000/=. Needl ess to go i n t o the .... I details o f t h i s a spe ct , s u f f i c e i t to s t a t e t h a t . r u l e 3 i s meant ' t o c o v e r ma t te r s which are b e f o r e the Court and f o r which no p r o v i s i o n i s made under the r u l e s . I n the i n s t a n t case, it is c l e a r t o me t h a t the mat ter p e r t a i n i n g to t ha t aspe ct i s not before t h i s Court. That i s , what i s sought by Mr. Maira, namely, depositing the* d e c r e t a l amount i n Court i s an a sp e ct touching on the pr oc e s s o f e x e c u t i o n . I t concerns the a l t e r a t i o n o f the c o n d i t i o n s o r terms o f the e x e c u t i o n and attachment pr ocess which i s the concern o f the Hi^h Court . I t should hove' been r a i s e d ....... - wi t h the High Court i f at a ll it was f e l t d e s i r a b l e . For that reason nnH with due r e s p e c t t o Mr. Maira, l e a r n e f l ’ Counsel, I am unable t o a cce pt h i s pr ay e r t o have the money d e po s i t e d i n Court. » I n the e v en t , and f o r the f o r e g o i n g reasons, the a p p l i c a t i o n i s di smi s s e d w i th c o s t s . DATED at OAR ES SALAAM t h i s 24th day o f June, 1997. D.Z. LUBUVA JUSTICE OF APPEAL 1 certify t hat t h i s i s 3 true copy o f the o r i g i n a l . / \ / \\- ----4 - /Nr'-v' ' \ ( U.M. LUANDA ) SENIOR DEPUTY REGISTRAR