19920717 TZCA Dar es Salaam

IN ~'..:, COtT.d.T OF :.P?i!i,".L OF T.tJi'J.lHIA 1~~~ Dliil ;.c;S ~J).,J+N!l CIVIL ,:.PPLIClTIOi: HOo 22 ·oF 1990 In -Le :;.:c.;~·~cr of 811 Intcndc;d. l..ppcal B:;;TW£EN Pl:J"i"ZJ.fiii. UlJIFOiWi J:J;D CLOTIIING CORPOIU:..TI ON". • • • • • • • • • • • .. 0 " • f • , , • • RESPONDIJ,TT (1:..pplic:.1.tion to disoiss t.t.c appeal i:-T o. 25 of 1990 fron tb, Decision of t.'.10 ITig.o. Court of Tanzania ~t Dar cs Sala...1Jll) (Iiffi;Z§).VaS, J ..tI(!) dated -'.;l1a 1st dajr of December, 1987 in Ci v:i.l Revision l-fo 1 .2 0£ 1937 di ....,,_ %!I.A,& RULING The applicant, T2.i.1za.1.1in Unifonn and Clothing ~rpQration, .!.la$ ell 6/10/1990 filed a notice of raotion through its learned ndvoca:lic, The last time, ..r~ch was tl1c seventh occ2..sioi14. ,this application came t1.p for b.Garing wan on 27/3/1992 wbc.n Omar, ~ ...:. •. adjourned th~ hta.l~ to allow the parties "to work out SomQ. _uncl.crstanding 11 as prDJfcd for by Mr. Maji t!..:.ia, When t!1e. a.pplica:l;i011 c.alll~ b4if0%'. ~- tcr lJ.G.e.mne:.,. lilt-• )Ylara.l'l.ClO, I learned Cou11scl, held tllo briefs for both l(;axn,cd advocates a.1.0. 011 -I their bcllalf a.akcd for ai.l a.djou.rnmcmt as th.~s was a. partly heard a.pplioa.tion and th..,1,t Om~, J ,A•• should continue with it. J-,,s l wantGd ~ 'but- .ooul.d not !:~-ize b ~ -f9c.m l11:'. Ma.ral:ldo, wha;'i; was thw_ undGrstandil1g a.rri vc,d at, I a.d.joU,1.i1c.d for a few !P4mr~es to fa.oilitatG t!1e a,ppoe,:.;-a..1ccs of Mr., Majitbie. and ill:'. Raithatha,.. J; .... •••/ ! 2 w2.s told t!.le.t no such u.ndc.rste.nd.ing ::-~as b<:.Gn rc.,.c!:cd as t.:.1.at would dq:ie11d on e. ce...S€ ctU'rcntly bd'ol'c, t::w liig11 Cou.r-.. of 'l'anzania. So see!dng to &trike 01.rt ,.;l.1.c notic<.; of appeal s.'.lor>J.d be ·lihc one making ) applica-tio:1s for sucb. n,dj0LU'l1.ffiGnts. I t.h.ougJ1t alo1..1cl ·whe:,tl~o.r it oJ.!otUd c,imiJ1g a:t, compromising. To that IVI.r. Maji tl:ia said. tta:~ 1.:.:-. RaitJ:)athc.1. - so in Cc,urt • I mtm1• confc::is t1y in,:;,~ili ty to comprcllcncl -'.;!us modus opcr,.:acli. liiaj:i thia 3Gcks to score a knock-out by_ a full th.rotlc attack to strike out t.\e notice of e,ppcal but thGn ho s,.;all:3 raid-e.ir. ':::is M I hav€ cl t'eacly allv.dcd to, th.is is t~ic eighth time this appli.:r,,tion h~ come up for hoe..ring.. ~he first tim( w2.S on 21st February; 1? 1, -- Co-i.,irt., particularly, s~:ot:ld all.ow itsGlf to be so ..1-SGd. I d., not l1avc t!.~c slightE:st doubt on r,iy mind that RulG 3 (;.::) (o) covers this situation •. Pi; provides that i- "(2) Wllorc it _is ncccssar.1 to ri<i];:e .=u1 order for the purposes of - (c) preventing an a,busG of t~10 process of -'i;!:c Courl, the, Court -:,:~, oi1 appl:i.cation or on its own motion, give di ructions c1,s to the· proccdtU'O to b0 adopted or make ~;ny vthP.r order which it cons idcrs 11eocssc1..ry" • ...../3 3 1..dmi t·tedly -',:;l:G n.p111 ication was pa.rtly .!.le.a.rd by Oraar, J .1•• , bu:~ that would not prov~rc ;nc; from refusing a p.rt'.Ycr for an hcal'd hy Oi:,rar, J ,l... is J:caly introductory and in <e'.l'JJT case; I could have hoe,rd tl1c; applica;ci 011 dG 11ovo • ~:.gain it cotu d be argued that · proceod with t:10 2p:plic.:-.:'i;io11 2l1d that l could ·only .:.1.avc ordGrod a diemiasal if they had :foiled to proeccd.t Bu"i:i ·the loan1e,d a.dvocatos :1ru1 ?,).:roa.c\Y agro<:.d to a.1 adjournment e.nd hcJ1cc did not (7cn enter appearances. . For tho sal;:o of uai11taini11g the honour of ·t.1is Court and prcvc,nting t;1c, abuse o:;; its process I order tl:.c dismissal of t.t.:: · application. DLT"~D at DAR ES S!J.,WI this 17th day of July, 1992. JUSTI CI; OF 41:PEf.L I cc,r"l.ify tl:i.c.t t~1is is a. t.ruo copy of the original« .. \