Chato Bevarage Final Summary Judhment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA GEITA SUB REGISTRY AT GEITA CIVIL CASE NO. 2591 OF 2025 THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY FUND…….…………..…………..….……….…..1ST PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY GENERAL…………………………………..………...……2ND PLAINTIFF VERSUS CHATO BEVERAGES COMPANY LIMITED………………..…………..DEFENDANT SUMMARY JUDGEMENT Date of last order: 19/02/2025 Date of Judgement: 14/03/2025 MWAKAPEJE, J.: The Plaintiffs, herein, by means of the summary procedure delineated in Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33, R.E 2019, have instituted this suit against the Defendant seeking the following orders, quoted verbatim: 1. The Defendant to be ordered to pay the sum of TZS 26,436,000 (Tanzanian Shillings Twenty-Six Million Four Hundred Thirty-Six Thousand Only) being unremitted members' contributions and penalties due and Page 1 of 7 payable to the Plaintiff by the Defendant as per paragraph 10 of the plaint. 2. Interest on the decretal sum at the Court rate of 7% from the date of delivery of Judgment until the same shall be fully satisfied; 3. Cost of and incidental to the filing of the suit; and 4. Any other and further relief as this Honorable Court shall deem fit and just to grant. Before engaging in the substantive issues of the matter, it is essential to recount the circumstances that have culminated in the present suit, as outlined in the plaint. The defendant was registered as a contributing employer member of the 1st plaintiff with a Membership Certificate of Registration Number 1027396, as detailed in annexure "NSSF-1." According to the governing law applicable to the 1st plaintiff, the defendant is obliged to make mandatory contributions on a monthly basis, both for itself and for its employees, at a rate of 10% each, totaling 20% of the employees' wages. Further allegations suggest that notwithstanding this legal requirement, the defendant has neglected, failed, or defaulted in remitting the members' contributions to the 1st plaintiff consistently each month, resulting in delayed payments that have incurred penalties. The facts Page 2 of 7 reveal that the defendant's failure to remit these contributions deprives its employees (the members of the plaintiffs) of critical pension benefits due upon retirement, death, or any other exit from the scheme. Moreover, the facts reveal that the defendant is in violation of its statutory duties and has defaulted in remitting the members' statutory contributions amounting to TZS 20,226,000.00 (Say Tanzanian Shillings Twenty Million Two Hundred Twenty-Six Thousand Only) as the outstanding principal members' contributions for the period between January 2022 to April 2023. This amount continues to accumulate as long as it remains unpaid, along with penalties amounting to TZS 6,210,000.00 (Tanzania Shillings Six Million Two Hundred Ten Thousand Only) for the same period. Consequently, the 1st plaintiff's total claim against the defendant is TZS 26,436,000 (Tanzanian Shillings Twenty-Six Million Four Hundred Thirty-Six Thousand Only) representing the outstanding principal members' contributions and penalties, which continue to accrue until settled. As a result of the defendant's breach and failure to comply with its statutory obligations to remit contributions, the Plaintiffs have persistently demanded compliance, but to no avail. To substantiate the claimed amount, the Plaintiffs have incorporated various documents in the complaint, including copies of the Certificates of Registration and Page 3 of 7 registration particulars confirming the defendant's membership with the 1st plaintiff, inspection reports, exit meeting reports, and a schedule detailing outstanding contributions and penalties. These documents are recognized as integral parts of the court's records. It is on these bases that the Plaintiffs have presented the prayers as delineated above. Upon convening for the hearing on 14 March 2025, the Plaintiffs were represented by Mr. William Mhina, the learned State Attorney. However, the defendant was noticeably absent and did not appear before the Court despite multiple notices. During his submissions, Mr. Mhina informed this Court that the defendant had not submitted an application requesting leave to appear and contest the suit. Due to this oversight, he urged the Court to proceed with issuing a summary judgment against the defendant in accordance with Order XXXV of the CPC, in conjunction with Section 74A (2) of the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) Act, Cap 50, R.E. 2018. Under Order XXXV Rule 2(2) of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap. 33, it is a well-settled legal principle that in summary proceedings, if the defendant fails to obtain leave to appear and defend, the allegations in the plaint are deemed admitted, leading to summary judgment in favour of the plaintiff. This principle is designed to promote judicial efficiency by preventing defendants from raising frivolous defences that could Page 4 of 7 unnecessarily delay the resolution of cases involving liquidated demands, promissory notes, and other clear monetary obligations as stipulated under Order XXXV Rule 1. In the case of CRDB Bank Limited vs. John Kagimbo Lwambagaza [2002] TLR 117, it was stated that: "The purpose of Order XXXV: Summary Procedure is to enable a Plaintiff to obtain Judgement expeditiously where the Defendant has in effect no substantial defense to the suit and prevent the Defendant from employing delaying tactics and, in the process, postpone the day of reckoning. I am of the settled view that order XXXV is self- contained in so far as it relates to suits stipulated thereunder." Moreover, it is established legal doctrine that the reliefs sought in a summary suit must strictly conform to those permissible under the summary procedure. These suits are specifically tailored for categories of claims such as those concerning liquidated demands, promissory notes, bills of exchange, and other evident monetary obligations as delineated in Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), Cap. 33; see the case of Prosper Paulo Massawe & Others vs Access Bank Tanzania Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 39 of 2014) [2021] TZCA 321 (22 July 2021). In light of the foregoing, the pertinent question now arises: does the present suit align with the types of matters prescribed under the summary procedure? Mr. Mhina requested this Court to acknowledge it as such under Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Act (CPA) in conjunction with Section 74A (2) of the NSSF Act, Cap 50 R.E. 2018, permitting a summary Page 5 of 7 judgment against the defendant. Section 74A (2) of the NSSF Act articulates that: "(2) Every contribution and additional contributions due to the Fund may be recovered by a summary suit under order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code at any time within twelve years after the date on which it is due." [Emphasis supplied] This provision distinctly underscores the specialised legal architecture governing the recovery of members' contributions, streamlined via summary procedures under Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). By explicitly authorising the use of an expedited legal mechanism, the law ensures that unpaid contributions are treated as statutory financial responsibilities, enforceable through prompt judicial remedies. It further strengthens the imperative nature of social security contributions, ensuring the Fund remains sufficiently capitalised and that compliance with statutory obligations is rigorously observed. Having thoroughly considered the provisions of the law, Mr Mhina's submissions, the facts of the case, the documentary evidence submitted, and the relevant legal precepts, I am persuaded that the plaintiffs have fulfilled the requisite threshold for the issuance of summary judgment. Accordingly, summary judgment is hereby granted in favour of the plaintiffs on the following reliefs: Page 6 of 7 (1) The defendant is ordered to pay the sum of TZS 26,436,000 (Tanzanian Shillings Twenty-Six Million Four Hundred Thirty-Six Thousand Only) being unremitted members' contributions and penalties due and payable to Plaintiff by Defendant; (2) Interest thereof at the Court's rate of 7% per annum from the date of delivery of the judgment to the date of full recovery; and (3) The Plaintiffs shall recover the costs arising from the suit. It is so ordered. DATED at GEITA this 14th day of March 2025. G.V. MWAKAPEJE JUDGE Page 7 of 7