20090605 TZHC Mwanza
It was improper for the appellant to file a fresh case for taxation in the Primary Court; the correct procedure was to file the bill of costs with the District Registrar since the case ended in the High Court.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 20090605 TZHC Mwanza
- Parties
- Appellant: Nyalagu Sigunemha; Respondent: Mayuma Magali
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 5 June 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Jurisdiction, Procedure for Filing Bill of Costs
- 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
Nyalagu Sigunemha
Appellant
Mayuma Magali
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Primary Court had jurisdiction to entertain a bill of costs after the case ended in the High Court
- 2 Whether the appellant followed proper taxation procedures
Ratio Decidendi
It was improper for the appellant to file a fresh case for taxation in the Primary Court; the correct procedure was to file the bill of costs with the District Registrar since the case ended in the High Court.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
. . ~• /"Li, . '.'t . IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA'. IN THE DISTRICT REGISTRY ATMWANZA CIVIL APPEAL CASE NO. 4 OF 2008 {Arising from Magu D.C Appeal No. 30/2007 From Original Civil Case No.124 of 2006 of the Primary court of Mkula at Magu) NYALAGU SIGUNEMHA ............... APPE.LLANT versus MAYUM~ MAGALI ........ ~~ .................... RESPONDENT JUDGEMENT 2/6 &._5/6/2009 Sumari, J The appellant Nyalagu Sigunemha instituted a fresh suit against . the respondent Mayuma Magali in Mkula l?rimary Court at Magu District, claiming for Tshs. 1,539,000/- been a bill of costs incurred by the appellant in P~C Civil Appeal no. 57/1996 which originated from Civil Appeal no. 137 /1995 in the District Court of Magu, which ~~. . also originated from original Civil Case no. 4/1995 at Mkula Primary Court. As it can be seen the case started from a Primary Court and ended up in .the High Court. So in essence the suit by the appellant in the Primary court of Mkula which is the source of this appeal was for taxation. The· Primary Court Magistrate .allowed a sum of Shs · 634,600/= only. The respondent was not satisfied so he successfully preferred an appeal to the District Court of Magu. JJJ; C The District court defaulted the trial court's decision on ground that the same was in violation of taxation procedures. That the trial - court misdirected itself since the matter started in the primary court and ended with the High Court according to taxation procedures, the bill of costs is filed with the District Registrar, who is the taxing ·master. The District court is very right that in defaulting the trial court's findings. In fact it was improper for the appellant to file a fresh case for taxation proceedings; he should have filed his bill of costs with the District Registrar since the case ended, in the High Court. The case of Hassan Kilala v Juma Said 1994 TLR 87 (HC) cited by the District Court is very relevant in this matter. The appellant'~ appeal for that matter has no legs in this court, it has to fail.. The same is dismissed. No .order as to costs. . Delivered in absent of both parties. ATMWANZA . 05/06/2009