rashid athuman iloko vs amina ramadhan somboko 2022 tzhclandd 12540 31 october 2022
Application for leave to appeal is unmaintainable where the underlying order is a dismissal for want of prosecution; proper remedy is to apply for setting aside the dismissal.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- rashid athuman iloko vs amina ramadhan somboko 2022 tzhclandd 12540 31 october 2022
- Parties
- Applicant: Rashid Athuman Iloko; Respondent: Amina Ramadhan Somboko
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 31 October 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application struck out
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Setting Aside Dismissal Orders
- 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
Rashid Athuman Iloko
Applicant
Amina Ramadhan Somboko
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal can be granted against a dismissal order for want of prosecution
Ratio Decidendi
Application for leave to appeal is unmaintainable where the underlying order is a dismissal for want of prosecution; proper remedy is to apply for setting aside the dismissal.
Court Disposition
Application struck out
Orders
- Application struck out
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION) AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO.428 OF 2022 {Originating from LandAppeaiNo. 33of2021) RASHID ATHUMAN ILOKO APPLICANT VERSUS AMINA RAMADHAN SOMBOKO RESPONDENT RULING Date ofLast Order: 12.10.2022 Date ofRuling: 31.10.2022 T. N. MWENEGOHA,J. The applicant is seeking for a leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal of Tanzania, against the whole decision of this court, vide Land Appeal No.33 of 2021. The application was made under Section 47(2) of the Land Disputes Courts Act, Cap 216 R. E. 2019 and Order XLII Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33 R. E. 2019. The same has been accompanied by the affidavit of the applicant, Rashid Athuman Iloko. The application was argued by way of written submissions. Advocate Peter Philemon Shapa, appeared for the applicant while the respondent appeared in person, i However, when composing his ruling, I noted that the applicant intends to appeal against a dismissal order. That, the Land Appeal No.33 of 2021 was dismissed upon the applicant's(appellant) failure to appear in court (see paragraphs 1-7 of the affidavit in support of the application). Having so noted, I realized that, the application before me is not maintainable owing to the said circumstances. The parties were ordered to address the court on the issue in question and both complied with the order. After considering the submissions of parties on the issue raised, I am of the view that the application is unmaintainable. As it is note above, the appeal before Hon. K.T.R Mteule, J. was dismissed for want for prosecution. The remedies available to the applicant is an application for setting aside the dismissal order, and not leave to appeal to Court of Appeal. To that end, the instant application is struck out. No order as to costs. It is so ordered. T. N.J4WENEG0HA JUDGE 31/10/2022 A. o ¥ •r r £ ¥