patrick ngiloi others vs ilala auction mart ltd 2005 tzhc 270 25 april 2005

IN l’ Cuil P.1GH COUtfi* o r T A N Z A N I A AT MOSHI MISC. CIVIL REVISION NO. 3 OF 2005 (C/F CIVIL CA;',E NO. 9 OF 2005) (MIoCo CIVIL AFFL. K 0. 7 OF 2005) (C/F CIVIL REVISION NO. 1 )F 2005) p a t u IC k n '-;i l o i ) (t/a 1. BP ilaran.'-a Serivice Station^ ) - AFFLICANTS 2. Marketing Service Station ) Versus ILALA AUCTION MART LTD.i (BP (T an zan ia) Limited J KESPONDSNT R U LI N G m i pu,... J . _ In this matter, this court had received a complaint from Mr, S andi l e arned ..advocate vide his letter Ref .No. G P S A / M I SC.CIVIL APPL./NO. 7 / 2005 dated 3/3/2005 in respect of M i sc.Civil Appl.No* .7/2005 filed in the Mcshi District Court the file which had been rcalled to this court vide Civil Revision No. 1 of 2005 instituted by 3P (Tanzania) Limited. 7 Having received the said letter, this court on iijs own opened Misc. Civil Revision No. 3 cf 2005 and summoned the parties to appear and a d d r ess this court. In Misc.Civil Appl.No. 7/2005 .filed in the lower court, the i A p p l icant is cfee Patrick i\?ilci trading as BP Karanga Service Station as well as BP Market Service Station and the ResvCndent is one Ilala Auction Mart Liibited. The application is based oh Civil Case No* 9/2005 also filed in the same court by the said Applicant against the said Respondent, BP (Tanzania) Limited is not a party in both the said application and the suit. In his letter, Mr. Sandi who is I ad vocating for the Applicant and the P l a i n t i f f in the said Application and the suit 'states as fellows:- ''•v. 5,Bot h the suit and the application were scheduled for mention today, however, on r e p orting to court as is t usual, I was informed that the fate of the matters was not k n o w n because the case files have been sent to the High Court however,,no reason for such more was furnished to-me, for which I am compelled to write this letter to you seeking to be apprised on the fate of m atters. As- far as I kncwj n e ither m y client nor the defendant, ILALA AUCTION-MART L I M I T : © has referred the matters to the Hi^h C o u r t 3 for w h i c h I don't know w h y they are there, however, I do understand that BP (Tanzania) Limited has filed an application for Revision in the High Court, w h ich in any event lias nothing at all to do with the said matters as B P is not a pa r t y in the matters* This is to k i n d l y therefore request you to look into the matter and hence take the n e c e s s a r y action* ¥ours faithfully. S£d: ................. Go P . ^Ai.'TDI, ADVOCATE ‘ * On 2 0 / V 2 0 0 5 * Mr„ Sendi acti:;./ for the a ove named Applicant and Mr. Kileo acti n g for ISP (Tanzania) Ltd, a d d r e s s e d this court* However, a fter deep consideration * I am of the view that this Misc.Civil Revision No. 3 of 2005 wls uncalled for because in the letter w r i tt en by Mr. Sandi there is no complaint calling for revision of the l o w e r court proceedings or orders. He simply wanted to be appraised on the that faite of the files which had been called to this court is Misc.Civil » Application l‘ fo. 7/2005 inclusive Civil Case No* 9/2005. In my considered view, it would have sufficed for the District Registrar respond to Mr. Sandi administratively. In any event Hr. Sandi has had an o p p o r t u n i t y •to present his •position in Civil Revision No# 1 of 2005 on the 'matters, the subject cf his above mentioned latter iijcludin^ his assertion that BP (Tar*zania) Ltd# is not a party in iMisc. Civil Application No. 7 of 2005 in the l ower court* On his p a r t r Mr. Kilec acting for 3P (Tanzania) Limited ha <5 also had an opportunity to respond to Mr* Sandi on the said matters. My Ri4ifl!? in Civil Revision Jv'o. 1 of 2005 suffices on the said m a tt ers toother ruling is uncalled for* ...... /3 Having expressed myself as above stated, I find no reason to act on the submissions made by Mr* S andi and Mr. Kiloe in this natter* This a pplication for revision opened b y this court on its own is h^ar^by out w i t h no costs tc the p a r t i e s It-is so ordered. F. A. R. JUNjQU x JUDGSV 25/V 200:|C. Right of Appeal explained* JUIXS3, 25/V2005 2.5/?/.<0°5 Ceram: F* A* R. JUNDU, J. ? For Applicant: Mr, Sandi, Advocate For Respondent: Mr. Sandi/tor* Kileo, Advocate CCi Mattiku \ I Court: Ruling delivered .in the presence of Mr, Sandi, leatned Advocate for the Applicant"’ and holding b rief for Mr, Kileo* learned advocate for the P<espond9n t # f: , F. A„ R„ JUNDU, f ;f JUDGE, -/ 25A/2005