t i investment bank ltd vs dn bahram c0mpany ltd 4 others 2004 tzhccomd 36 19 november 2004

t i investment bank ltd vs dn bahram c0mpany ltd 4 others 2004 tzhccomd 36 19 november 2004

The 4th and 5th Defendants, as guarantors, are liable for the debt as their liability is co-extensive with the principal debtor, and the agreements do not provide otherwise. Admission of liability by all Defendants and the terms of the guarantee agreements justify judgment for the Plaintiff.

Citation
t i investment bank ltd vs dn bahram c0mpany ltd 4 others 2004 tzhccomd 36 19 november 2004
Parties
Plaintiff: Tanzania Postal Bank; 1st Defendant: D.N. Bahram & Company Ltd; 2nd Defendant: Dadrahman Burmohamed Bahram; 3rd Defendant: Merbibi Dadrahman Bahram; 4th Defendant: Mathew Thomas Mbatta; 5th Defendant: Joseph Simbiligunga Mwachullah
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
19 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Judgment After Partial Admission and Trial Against Remaining Defendants
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiff against the 4th and 5th Defendants; liability is joint and several with the 1st-3rd Defendants, but the amount recoverable is not separate.
Legal Topics
Loan Default, Guarantee Liability, Interest on Judgment Debt
Source Language
English
Banking Law Contract Law Loan Default Guarantee Liability Interest on Judgment Debt

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

Parties

Tanzania Postal Bank

Plaintiff

D.N. Bahram & Company Ltd

1st Defendant

Dadrahman Burmohamed Bahram

2nd Defendant

Merbibi Dadrahman Bahram

3rd Defendant

Mathew Thomas Mbatta

4th Defendant

Joseph Simbiligunga Mwachullah

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Judgment After Partial Admission and Trial Against Remaining Defendants

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants are in breach of the loan facility agreement
  2. 2 Whether due default and demand notices were served upon the 2nd - 5th Defendants
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd - 5th Defendants are legally liable under the Agreement as guarantors

Ratio Decidendi

The 4th and 5th Defendants, as guarantors, are liable for the debt as their liability is co-extensive with the principal debtor, and the agreements do not provide otherwise. Admission of liability by all Defendants and the terms of the guarantee agreements justify judgment for the Plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiff against the 4th and 5th Defendants; liability is joint and several with the 1st-3rd Defendants, but the amount recoverable is not separate.

Orders

  • 4th and 5th Defendants to pay Tshs. 171,685,507.74 as principal sum
  • Interest at 16% per annum on the principal sum from July 2003 to 19/11/2004