SIKONGE vs Magdalena

SIKONGE vs Magdalena

Defendants were duly served but failed to seek leave to defend within statutory time; under Order XXXV Rule 2(2) of the Civil Procedure Code, allegations in the plaint are deemed admitted and plaintiff is entitled to judgment for the claimed amount, interest, and costs.

Citation
SIKONGE vs Magdalena
Parties
Plaintiff: Sikonge District Council; Plaintiff: Attorney General; Defendant: Magdalena Philimon Mangula; Defendant: David S. Mwakatimbo
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
4 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Summary Suit / Summary Judgment
Outcome
summary judgment for plaintiff
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Revenue Collection, Agency, Guarantee, Debt Recovery
Source Language
English

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sikonge District Council

Plaintiff

Attorney General

Plaintiff

Magdalena Philimon Mangula

Defendant

David S. Mwakatimbo

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Summary Suit / Summary Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are liable to pay the undeposited revenue collected by the 1st defendant as agent of the 1st plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment due to defendants' failure to seek leave to defend

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants were duly served but failed to seek leave to defend within statutory time; under Order XXXV Rule 2(2) of the Civil Procedure Code, allegations in the plaint are deemed admitted and plaintiff is entitled to judgment for the claimed amount, interest, and costs.

Court Disposition

summary judgment for plaintiff

Orders

  • Defendants to pay Tshs. 7,123,303/= as undeposited revenue
  • Defendants to pay interest of 25% on the claimed amount