salum mohamed salum vs kione bakari salum 2020 tzhclandd 2258 15 july 2020
As there was no opposition from the respondent and the application was made under the correct law, the applicant is entitled to the leave sought.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- salum mohamed salum vs kione bakari salum 2020 tzhclandd 2258 15 july 2020
- Parties
- Applicant: Salim Mohamed Salim; Respondent: Kione Bakari Salum
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 15 July 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Misc. Land Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application granted
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Appellate Jurisdiction
- 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
Salim Mohamed Salim
Applicant
Kione Bakari Salum
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Misc. Land Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal from the decision of the High Court in Misc. Land Appeal No. 121 of 2018
Ratio Decidendi
As there was no opposition from the respondent and the application was made under the correct law, the applicant is entitled to the leave sought.
Court Disposition
Application granted
Orders
- Leave granted to the applicant to lodge an appeal to the Court of Appeal
- Costs to follow the event
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Is i IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION) AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO. 531 OF 2019 SALIM MOHAMED SALIM APPLICANT VERSUS KIONE BAKARI SALUM RESPONDENT RULING MGETTA,J: One Salimu Mohamed Salim, the applicant, on 13'^ September, 2019 present for filing a Chamber Summons made under section 47(2) of the Land Disputes Courts Act, CAP.216 seeking for a leave to enable him lodge an appeal to the Court of Appeal from the decision of this court In Misc. Land Appeal No. 121 of 2018 delivered on 16"^ August 2019. The application Is supported by his affirmed affidavit. It was ordered that the application be heard by way of written submissions. It was only the applicant who filed his written submission, but J r ~ the respondent filed none. That was in default of the order given on 19/5/2020 by this court. As a result, I proceeded to compose this ruling In absence of the respondent's written submission. As it is, the application was predicated under a correct law of the land. It is a requirement of the law that before lodging an appeal to the Court of Appeal an aggrieved party by the decision of this court passed in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, to first seek a leave of this court or of the Court of Appeal, if the High Court refuses to grant it. This is what the applicant has done and is what is praying for. As there is no opposition from the respondent, I don't see any reason why should I deny the applicant what he has prayed for. In the event, I proceed to grant a leave to the applicant to enable him lodge an appeal to the Court of Appeal. Costs to follow the event. It is so ordered. ^=5^- 11^ J.S.MGETTA JUDGE 15/7/2020 COURT: The ruling is delivered today this 15^^ July, 2020 in the presence of the applicant in person, but in absence of the respondent for reasons known to himself. O J.S.MGETTA JUDGE 15/7/2020