Misc
- Citation
- Misc
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TANZLII
- Decision
- 18 October 2024
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Withdrawal of Application
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TANZLII
- Decision
- 18 October 2024
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Withdrawal of Application
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The application was withdrawn at the earliest stage and no costs were warranted; withdrawal granted without order as to costs.
Court disposition
Application withdrawn without order as to costs.
Orders
- Application marked withdrawn without order as to costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Robert Charles Oteyo [As Administrator of the Estate of the Late Charles Moses Abulwa, the deceased]
Applicant/debtorAbdirahaman Mohamed Mussa
1st Respondent/decree Holder Counsel: Mpaya Kamara, Mahamoud MussaThe Attorney General
2nd Respondent Counsel: Urso LuogaDar es Salaam City Council
3rd Respondent Counsel: Urso Luoga03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Withdrawal of Application
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the application should be withdrawn
- 02
Whether withdrawal should be without costs
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The application contained errors and should be withdrawn for clarity of court records.
- Respondent
- No objection to the withdrawal.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
General principles of civil procedure
An applicant or plaintiff is at liberty to withdraw their application at any stage of the proceedings, subject to balancing respondent's interests if expenses have been incurred.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The application was withdrawn at the earliest stage and no costs were warranted; withdrawal granted without order as to costs.
Court disposition
Application withdrawn without order as to costs.
- Application marked withdrawn without order as to costs.
Source and reliance status
TANZLII · 18 October 2024
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TANZLII
Judgment· 18 October 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION)
AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO 26638 OF 2024 ROBERT CHARLES OTEYO [As Administrator of the Estate of the Late CHARLES MOSES ABULWA, the deceased].................................................... APPLICANT/DEBTOR
VERSUS ABDIRAHAMAN MOHAMED MUSSA .......1st RESPONDENT D/HOLDER THE ATTORNEY GENERAL........................... 2nd RESPONDENT DAR ES SALAAM CITY COUNCIL...................... 3rd RESPONDENT
RULING Date of last Order: 15/11/2024 Date of Ruling: 18/11/2024 LALTAIKA, J. When this Application was called for mention on 13/11/2024 the Applicant appeared in person, unrepresented. Messrs. Mpaya Kamara and Mahamoud Mussa, learned Advocates, appeared for the 1st Respondent while Mr. Urso Luoga, learned State Attorney appeared for the 2nd and 3rd Respondents. The Applicant quickly submitted that it had come to his knowledge that the application contained errors that in his opinion were not worthy Page 1 of 3 of proceeding for purposes of clarity of court records. He prayed to withdraw the application. Non of the Counsel for the Respondents objected the prayer. The issue before this Court is twofold: first, whether the application should be withdrawn and second, if the answer is to the affirmative, whether it should be withdrawn without costs. The law provides that an Applicant or Plaintiff is at liberty to withdraw their application at any stage of the proceedings. However, a balance must be struck between the Applicant's right to withdraw and the Respondent's interest, especially when expenses have been incurred in response to the application. Having carefully examined the Court records, I entertain no doubt the Application has been withdrawn at the earliest stage possible. In the upshot, the application is hereby marked withdrawn without an order as to costs. It is so ordered. I. LA LTAl KA
JUDGE 18/11/2024 Page 2 of 3 COURT: Ruling delivered in Chambers this 18th day of October 2024 in the absence ofparties. Page 3 of 3
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.