Tarime DC vs Lummy General Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA MUSOMA SUB REGISTRY AT MUSOMA CIVIL CASE NO. 000036 OF 2025 REFERENCE NO. 202501061000000367 BETWEEN TARIME DISTRICT COUNCIL....................................................... 1st PLAINTIFF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL................. 2nd PLAINTIFF VERSUS LUMRY GENERAL SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED..................... DEFENDANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT 02nd and OB"1 April, 2025 M, L KOMBA, J.: In a way of summary suit, the 1st plaintiff is claiming from defendant a sum of TZS 6,223,196.45/= being unpaid balance of Service Levy supposed to be paid to the 1st Plaintiff for a diverse period since January 2023 to July 2024 and a total of TZS 20,000,000/= being exemplary damage. The 1st Plaintiff herein is the Authority legally mandated to collect revenue from various sources including taxes, fees, charges and 0.3% of business Page 1 of 4 Turn Over as service levy from different persons, Entities, Institutions and Companies which conducts or operates business within the area of its jurisdiction. The defendant is one of the entities required to pay the service levy. The amount claimed is a service levy which is payable to the 1st plaintiff for services rendered within the Town. Basing on section 6(l)(u) of the Local Government Finance Act, Cap 290 R.E 2019, the amount claimed is calculated basing on 0.3% of the sales of the company as indicated previously. As per plaint, defendant is aware of the debt which is the balance of last instalment agreed between the two. Apart from reminder sent to her, defendant failed to pay the remaining amount. In suits of this nature, defendant has no automatic right to defend, the leave must be sought and obtained as per provisions of Order XXXV Rule 2(2) of the Civil Procedure Code Cap 33 R.E 2022. Undoubtedly, failure to obtain leave, the Plaintiff will be entitled to the Judgement and Decree on the amount claimed. From the record, defendant failed to obtain leave to defend regardless that he was served with summons. He did not show up in any of the scheduled Paap9 nf A date although he is aware of this suit. That is to say, the Defendant have defaulted in obtaining leave to appear and defend the suit. Ms. Neema Mwaipyana who represented the Plaintiff prayed for a summary judgment under Order XXXV Rule 2(2). The cited provision is to the effect that in default of the defendant obtaining such leave or of his appearance and defence in pursuance thereof, the allegations in the plaint shall be deemed to be admitted. It was pleaded by the 1st Plaintiff that Defendant herein is one among the Companies which operates its businesses dealings in Mining, Minerals and Royalty received from Mining activities by North Mara Gold Mining within Tarime District Council and thereby responsible for the payment of 0.3% of his net Turn Over after excluding VAT as service levy to the 1st Plaintiff herein. Following demand notice and discussion, the two agreed the debt to be paid in three instalments but the last instalment worth TZS 6,223,196.45/= was not paid. Basing on this, plaintiffs are claiming for summary judgment in their favour. Under Order XXXV Rule 2, I hereby pronounce judgment in favour of the plaintiffs and against the Defendant for the sum of TZS 6,223,196.45/=. Page 3 of 4 No order for interest and no order as to costs. DATED at MUSOMA this 08th day of April, 2025. Daaa A ।