the registered trustees of masjid al azhal and another v assistant registrar of titles and another 2024 tzhc 770 12 march 2024
- Citation
- the registered trustees of masjid al azhal and another v assistant registrar of titles and another 2024 tzhc 770 12 march 2024
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 12 March 2024
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Land Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Status Quo Order
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 12 March 2024
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Land Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Status Quo Order
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The immediacy and mandate of the rectification notice indicated that change of registration of title may adversely affect the appellant, justifying the grant of the status quo order.
Court disposition
application granted
Orders
- Order maintaining the status quo pending determination of appeal
02
Material facts
Parties
Registered Trustees of Masjid Al-Azhal and Madrasat Al-Hayatil Islamia
Appellant Counsel: Hamisi Mkindi, Nicodemus MbughaAssistant Registrar of Titles
1st Respondent Counsel: Hance MmbandoAttorney General
2nd Respondent Counsel: Hance Mmbando03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Land Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Status Quo Order
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether the court should grant an order maintaining the status quo pending appeal against rectification of land register
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The appellant argued that Order 39 Rule 5(1) of the Civil Procedure Code empowers the court to maintain status quo and that rectification would cause irreparable loss by changing the certificate of title from the appellant to the President, rendering the appeal nugatory.
- Respondent
- The respondent, represented by the State Attorney, had no objection to the application.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Order 39 Rule 5(1) of the Civil Procedure Code [Cap 33 RE 2019]
Court's power to maintain status quo pending determination of appeal
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The immediacy and mandate of the rectification notice indicated that change of registration of title may adversely affect the appellant, justifying the grant of the status quo order.
Court disposition
application granted
- Order maintaining the status quo pending determination of appeal
Source and reliance status
TZHC · 12 March 2024
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TZHC
Judgment· 12 March 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE SUB - REGISTRY OF MANYARA
AT BABATI MISCELLANEOUS LAND APPEAL NO 4279 OF 2024 (Originating from the decision and order of the Assistant Registrar of Titles Babati, Manyara Region made under section 99 (1) of the Land Registration Act, Cap 334) THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF MASJID AL-AZHAL AND MADRASAT AL- HAYATIL ISLAMIA....................................................... APPELLANT
VERSUS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF TITLES....................................... 1st RESPONDENT ATTORNEY GENERAL.............................................................. 2nd RESPONDENT
REASONS FOR THE RULING OF THE COURT 8th and 12th March, 2024 MIRINDO J.: When the appeal came for hearing on 8th March 2024, the appellant, the Registered Trustees of Masjid Al-Azhal and Madrasat Al-Hayatil Islamia, appellant applied for an order to maintain the status quo in terms of the provisions of Rule 5(1) of Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Code [Cap 33 RE 2019]. The appellant was served with a notice to rectify the Land Register by the Assistant Registrar of Titles in Manyara Region. The notice directed the appellant to submit for cancellation the Certificate of Title No 9718 of the Land Registry Moshi within thirty days from the date of the issuance of the rectification notice, that is from 8th February to 8th March 2024. The thirty days 1 were to expire on 9th March 2024. After hearing the parties, I granted the order maintaining the status quo and reserved my reasons for doing so. I now give the reasons. The appellant was represented by learned Advocates, Advocate Mr Hamisi Mkindi and Mr Nicodemus Mbugha. The respondents were represented by the learned State Attorney, Mr Hance Mmbando. The learned Advocate Mbugha argued that the provisions of Order 39 Rule 5(1) of the Civil Procedure Code empower this Court to the maintain status quo. He argued that, should the Assistant Registrar proceed with his intention to rectify the Land Register after 9th March 2024, the
appellant will suffer irreparable loss. The loss is the nature of change of the name of the certificate of title from that of the appellant to that of Her Excellency the President of the United Republic of Tanzania. If that intention is carried the appeal before this Court will be of no essence. The learned State Attorney, Mr Mmbando, had no objection. In my considered opinion, the immediacy of notice of rectification and its mandate to the appellant indicate that the change of registration of title may adversely affect the appellant. It was for these reasons that I granted the application. F.M. MIRINDO
JUDGE 12/3/2024 2
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.