20030321 TZHC Arusha

I I lz I • IN THE HIGH COURT ffl! T.AJ.'lZANIA ROS~ BEN1'"'Y NJIRO " ... • •• cl O 0 0 0 O .. " e Cl O APPLICANT - Versus - lo TANZANIA viILDLIF:S CORPORATION ) 2 .. PARASTATAL SECTOR REFORM COMMISSION ~ ••• .... RESPONDENTS (Receiver .9..f the laJi~spond-3..ntj ~ 2..~.,,_---~------- ----- R U L I ...-~_,.,_ N G · Th:i.s is a very·' simple application for amendment of a .. pl.aint.. The reasons for amending are well stated in the affidavit .• ....:.·: 1':.led in: support· of the applia-at1'6n-,- and also amplified in the submissions· written and filed.'by Mro Alute learned advocate for .. the applicant .. On the other qand, the respondents have strongly resisted the ··application;, In· the respondents• joint Counter ~- , ..... , . :.Affidavit and also· in the written submission filed on their behalf ,. .' ti by !."lesFrr.q,:. Mi,t.~J. 11 J~r:: a.11u iiyag?- ~awalla learned advocates, it will be clear _that "they are saying that the application is misconceived mainly, and allegedly, because the claims being in the nature of unliquidatecL damages in tort are not'. provable in Bankruptcy, and are also not provablP. aEainst the Receiver under The Bankruptcy - Ordinance .. To this .extent, the two learned counsel have cited a ~ t •. , •••• /2 .' 2 ~,, number o:f autµ.oritie's in supp·c>rt. of.' -this major paint. ..-. -~·~,;. . '. In pis. r~ji;?inder~ .,IY"~ •. Alute . . Mughwai has strongly submitted that ............ the _res-oondents' ·c·ontent{cfri~ . :cb:-e ·tm.founded. · 1:~ain, he too has ♦• •. ,. \"! .. . . , ,, . " ~. . . • •. ci tE ,~ , numb~r pf_ authori~ies ''in support of his view. I wi).l be very brief,. -· r .have, no doub_t, read the respective . parti,:,. . written submissions with-very keen interesto In the end, . : ... , .. ) stage. t6--determi·ne the !lobjec~io?sa ra~se_d b;y th~ r~spondents? • , . . ; ' ... ~·1 '· :.... q . • ) . .. '. . .;... · · Ih m;y coii.sidereq vi:ew, .it' •is'"riot. So far, .. the :2nd respondent is If so, I ~~}i.nk, prudence· wil1· demand that . \ . it is r: ,1J.y after .the 2n?-. respondent has been impleaded and made pari;J to the suit.that the nobjectionsir could be taken up and de- termi~:'.". :-.c_0ordingly. For this Court to· be asked to determine the objections now will actually amount to being asked to --- ,, ' j 11 cross the bric: '- '_·.:ore reachizig_,:it" o In fact, even in R~e.9; and ~ort~e:p:1 points canvassed the:i;-ei,!1 were made in suits and not in an MI?..li.= My sb.):.-:-J:: advice to learned . ,Ge.unsel . will be this:~ Let them reserve their :"'"·i_ri+.;.s· ·2nrllrrr 1i,"id arguments for the appropriate time(s)o . . . Under. the, _provisions qf:··ord.~r._I R;_1.le...1Q~. o! .!h,.L9.iv~l ~g-~_}.u:7,?_Q_QS~-e-.2,,_i9§_§ 1~ this .~ourt ·has discretionary power to Order .••••• 9 ~13 ... • 3 ~nwnent. In ex.e~.cis.e cif' t ~ l'('Mer, the applieation is accor~ dingly granted. I realize that rriro Alute Mughwai has prayed for costs because tl.91.ooothe application has been opposed very vigor- ouslyooo .. 110 In my view, it is true that the applicatfon was opp- osed very vigorously. However, it is also true that my decision in this matter has been based on my own reasoning. In the circu- mstances, it will only be fair that each party bears it,a. own costs of the applicationo It is so Ordered accordingly. y,'-1fl J. H., MSOFFE JUDGE 21/3/2003 21/3L209.2, poram: Khaday - DR Mr. Mwaluko/Mughwai for applicant. Mr. Mwaluko for Respondent. Mr., Mwaluko: I am also holding brief of Mr. Mughwai eounsel for the applicant, Judgment read out today 21/3/2003 in the presence of Mr. !V"iwaluko counsel for the Respondent and who is also holding brief of Mr. Mughwai counsel for the Applicant. P. B. ~~iv ,,.., DISTRICT REGISTR.lili ARUSHA 21/3/2003 JHM/jno