jitesh jayantilal ladwa another vs dhirajilal walji ladwa others 2022 tzca 290 18 may 2022

jitesh jayantilal ladwa another vs dhirajilal walji ladwa others 2022 tzca 290 18 may 2022

The application for review failed because no manifest error apparent on the face of the record was established; the grounds advanced were essentially the same as those rejected in the prior revision application and did not meet the statutory threshold for review. Revisionary powers are limited by section 5(2)(d) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, barring review of interlocutory orders not finally determining the suit.

Citation
jitesh jayantilal ladwa another vs dhirajilal walji ladwa others 2022 tzca 290 18 may 2022
Parties
1st Applicant: Jitesh Jayantilal Ladwa; 2nd Applicant: Indian Ocean Hotels Limited; 1st Respondent: Dhirajilal Walji Ladwa; 2nd Respondent: Chandulal Walji Ladwa; 3rd Respondent: Nilesh Jayantilal Ladwa
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
18 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Application for Review / Ruling on Application for Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Review of Court Decisions, Revisionary Powers, Interlocutory Orders, Shareholder Disputes
Source Language
English
Company Law Civil Procedure Review of Court Decisions Revisionary Powers Interlocutory Orders Shareholder Disputes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jitesh Jayantilal Ladwa

1st Applicant

Indian Ocean Hotels Limited

2nd Applicant

Dhirajilal Walji Ladwa

1st Respondent

Chandulal Walji Ladwa

2nd Respondent

Nilesh Jayantilal Ladwa

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application for Review / Ruling on Application for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court's prior ruling contained an error apparent on the face of the record justifying review
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's statement regarding respondents' status prejudiced the applicants
  3. 3 Whether revisionary powers under section 4(3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act are subject to section 5(2) limitations

Ratio Decidendi

The application for review failed because no manifest error apparent on the face of the record was established; the grounds advanced were essentially the same as those rejected in the prior revision application and did not meet the statutory threshold for review. Revisionary powers are limited by section 5(2)(d) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, barring review of interlocutory orders not finally determining the suit.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application for review dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to respondents.