I M LTD SCANNED

IN THE HIGH COURT Of TTE UNITED REPUBlJC OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION) AT DAR ES SALAAM LAND CASE NO. 23787 O! 2024 SHILOH TRADING COMPANY LIMITED .... . ......... PLAINTIFF VERSUS ' I 8i M BANK (T) LIMITED...;....;.'.;... ...... ..1st DEFENDANT NUMTEG AUCTIONERS & PROPERTY MANAGERS CO LTD............................. .2nd DEFENDANT HASSANAT MOHAMED. NURMOHAMED............ .......1..... ... .....3RDDEFENDANT RULING / './ft if/ /asI. Pit/<ir: Psfy2025 t/ARuling: 25/^2025 LAI JAIKAJL I he Plaintiff herein SHILOH TRADING COMPANY LIMITED (herein after referred to as the plaintiff) instituted this suite praying for Orders, Judgment and Decree against: the Defendants as follows: /. Declaratory order that the r‘ and 2nd Defendants at ( 0/ Auctioning the Plaintiff's Suit property was procured by illegality for want of Noth<■ < hAuction to be issued to the Plaintiff b Dt 'daratory order that, the Pl(/ Defendant: act of am tioning the Plaintiffs landed piopcrty without obtaining the current market value was illegal. Page 1 of 5 nt That the Notice of vacating me suit landed propct ty r>sui •</ by the 2Jd Defendant and the new Title acquired or Transferred to the 7lr Defendant is void ab-initial, as kit emanates from illegal procedure. a That the Plaintiff be restored into possession and status of his property as it was before the transfer of Tide was effected by the 2nd Defendant. k. That the Defendants Jointly and severally be ordered to pay the Plaintiff, Tanzania Shillings 600,000,000 (Say Six Hundred Million), being the specific damage suffered by the plaintiff as (he result of the Defendants /// illegal and fraudulent conduct and tempering with the Plaintiffs Title ove/ Hu - suit landed property, including but not limited to transfer ownership to the thud defendant, vi. Payment of general damages to the tune of Tanzania Shillings Two Hundreds Million by the Defendants jointly and severally being distiubances and continuous unrest encountered by the plaintiff during effecting the loan to the 1st Defendant. vii Payment of decretal amount 7% interest at the couit rate from the date of Judgment to the date of final satisfaction of the Decree Pj the Defendants jointly and severally. v/if Paynu nt of decretal amount of 2Pl interest at the o ninth n.ial rate from the date oi institution this suit to the date ofJudgment. ix Any other relief (s) that this Honorable Court may deem nt to grant. When the suit was called for 1st PTC earlier today, the Plaintiff was conspicuously absent. The Defendant's on the othei hand, enjoyed the legal services of Messrs. Killey Mwitasi, George Msandi and Keneth Mugurusi, learned Advocates. Mr. Msandi submitted that the matter had been scheduled for the first Pro Trial Conference (PTC); however, the plaintiff was absent. He stated that they had made efforts to locate her once again, but to no avail. Furthermore, lie pointed out that the plaintiff had previously instil tiled a similar matter with the same cause of action, namely Land Case No. 11 of 2018, before I Ion. Opiyo J., which had been struck out for being incompetent. He added Page 2 of 5 Hial in 2.024, the plaintiff re-instituted the matter under Land Case No. 10421 of 202.4 before Hemed J., but it was again struck out for want of prosecution. Uh leafier, the plaintiff instituted yet another case, Land Case No. 23787 of JO? I, whir h was presently belore the court and involved the same cause of ad ion. Mr. Msancli further argued that, considering the plaintiff’s repeated abandonment of cases, her conduct amounted to an abuse of the court process and a waste of judicial time. He, therefore, prayed for the outright dismissal of the suit with costs, relying on Order IX Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code Cap 33 RE 2019, and noting that all respondents were belore Hie court. Mr. Mwitasi supported the submission and added that, apart from what lie I armed as the plaintiff's bad habit, it was also important to recall that the mailer had been fixed for the first PTC. He submitted I hat the effect of non- appearance in such a case was the dismissal of the soil, Similarly, Mr. Mugurusy associated himself with Hie submissions of his colleagues and sought to draw the court's attention Io the case of Alex Mulyabintu v. Case Western Reserve University and Makerere University, Page 3 of 5 t .ivil Appeal No. 190 of 2013. He pointed out that in its decision delivered on 25111 June 202.0, the Ugandan Court of Appeal had acknowledged the sl.alutory provisions allowing for the dismissal of a suit due to non- appearance of the parties. In conclusion, he fully seconded the prayer for outright, dismissal of the suit with costs. I laving carefully considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the Defendants and upon examining the record, this Court finds that the plaintiff has persistently failed to prosecute her claims. The previous suits, which were either struck out for incompetency or want of prosecution, demonstrate a lack of diligence on the part of the plaintiff. Furthermore, her failure to appear for the first PTC, without providing any explanation, signals a continued disregard for the court process. < )rder IX Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap. 33 K.E. 2019, empowers I ho Court to dismiss a suit where the plaintiff fails to prosecute the case diligently. Additionally, courts have consistently held that litigation must not be allowed to remain pending indefinitely to the detriment of the opposing parly and the efficient administration of justice. As observed in Alex Mulyabintu v. Case Western Reserve University and Makerere Page 4 of 5 University (supra), procedural laws exist to ensure the orderly and expeditious determination of disputes. In the circumstances of this case, the plaintiff's failure to appear and her hislory of instituting and abandoning suits on the same cause of action amount to an abuse of the court process. This Corn I will not allow such conduct: to persist. Accordingly, this suit is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with costs. II is so ordered. E.L LALTAIKA JUDGE 25/02/2025 Com t: Ruling delivered in Court Chambers; this 2.5th day of February 2025 in Ilie presence of Messrs. Killey MwiUisi, George Msandi and Keneth Mugurusi, learned Advocates, Counsel for the Defendants and in Hi,• absence of the Plainitiff and/or theii Counsel. Page 5 of 5