MAZONGERAA BUILDING CONTRACTORS LTD VS DIMOND TRUST BANK T LTD MISC

MAZONGERAA BUILDING CONTRACTORS LTD VS DIMOND TRUST BANK T LTD MISC

The application was struck out as incompetent because the applicants failed to cite the enabling provision (Order XXXV Rule 3(1)) of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33, which is necessary to move the court to determine the application for leave to defend a summary suit.

Citation
MAZONGERAA BUILDING CONTRACTORS LTD VS DIMOND TRUST BANK T LTD MISC
Parties
Applicant/defendant: Mazongera Building Contractors Ltd; Applicant/defendant: Salum Suleiman Ale; Applicant/defendant: Suleman Salum; Applicant/defendant: Masoud Salum; Respondent/plaintiff: Diamond Trust Bank (T) Ltd
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Defend Summary Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Application
Outcome
application struck out as incompetent
Legal Topics
Summary Suit, Leave to Defend, Proper Citation of Enabling Provision, Mortgage Financing
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Banking Law Mortgage Law Summary Suit Leave to Defend Proper Citation of Enabling Provision Mortgage Financing

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mazongera Building Contractors Ltd

Applicant/defendant

Salum Suleiman Ale

Applicant/defendant

Suleman Salum

Applicant/defendant

Masoud Salum

Applicant/defendant

Diamond Trust Bank (T) Ltd

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Defend Summary Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for leave to appear and defend the summary suit was made under the correct provision of the law
  2. 2 Whether the applicants provided sufficient reason to be granted leave to defend the suit

Ratio Decidendi

The application was struck out as incompetent because the applicants failed to cite the enabling provision (Order XXXV Rule 3(1)) of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33, which is necessary to move the court to determine the application for leave to defend a summary suit.

Court Disposition

application struck out as incompetent

Orders

  • Application for leave to appear and defend the suit is struck out for failure to cite the enabling provision of the law.
  • Applicants are ordered to pay half of the respondent's costs incurred in pursuing the application.