tanzania fertilezer co ltd vs tusevele kamene dr kamene others 2015 tzhc 2171 12 august 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT MBEYA CIVIL CASE NO. 10 OF 2014 TANZANIA FERTILEZER CO. LTD .............................. PLAINTIFF VERSUS 1. TUSEVELE KAMENEftf DR. KAMENE 2. ERNEST MKISI 3. CHAINA J. MGALA ......... DEFENDANTS 4. JUMA MKONONGO RULING Date o f last Order: 09/07/2015 Date o f Ruling: 12/ 08/2015 A.F. NGWALA, J. In their joint Written Statement of Defence the defendants had raised an objection in accordance with Order VIII Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code CAP. 33 R.E. 2002. That objection was to the effect that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit. Arguing in support of the objection Mr. Mushokorwa submitted that the requirement of Order VII Rule I (i) of the Civil Procedure Code was not complied with, as the Plaint did not state the value of the subject matter for the purposes of determining the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court and assessment of the court fees. In support of this argument he cited the decision of High Court of Tanzania in Civil Case No. 86/2006 Rev. C. Mtikila vrs. Yusuf Mehbood Manji and nine others. This case held that the facts l showing the jurisdiction of the court must be stated in the Plaint. Mr. Mushokorwa argued as the jurisdiction was not stated in the Plaint the suit must be dismissed. In reply Mr. Ndunguru clearly pointed the paragraphs in the Plaint which show the value and amount of Tshs. 107,420,450/= which the Plaintiff is claiming. He insisted that a Statement on the cause of action is in the contents of the paragraphs on the Plaint and the relevant paragraphs showed the jurisdiction of the court. For this reason he prayed for the dismissal of the purported preliminary objection. Upon perusal of the Plaint and the cited authority by his Lordship. Prof. Juma, J as he then was, I have no doubt that the facts in the present Plaint are quite distinguishable from the said case. It is clear that the jurisdiction of this court and the value of the subject matter in this suit is clearly indicated in the Plaint. The Plaint discloses the cause of the action and jurisdiction of this court to entertain the suit. For this reason I see no merit in the preliminary objection raised. Accordingly it is overruled with costs. Let us proceed with this suit without unnecessary undue delay. Order accordingly. / A.F. NGWALA JUDGE 12/08/2015 Date: 12/08/2015 Coram: A.F. NGWALA, J. Plaintiff: Present For Plaintiff: Absent 1st Defendant: Present 2nd Defendant: Absent 3rd Defendant: Absent 4th Defendant: Absent For Defendants: Mr. Mushokorwa Court: Ruling of the court delivered in court in the presence of Mr. Mushokorwa. Mr. Mushokorwa: Madame Judge, I pray for a date of 1st .... Order: 1. Hearing on 03/11/2015 2. Plaintiff to be notified.