ZUHURA ATHUMAN MUSTAFA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE SUB-REGISTRY OF MWANZA AT MWANZA MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO. 5387 OF 2024 (Arising from Land Application No. 33 of 2022 of the District Land and Housing Tribunal of Ukerewe) ZUHURA ATHUMAN MUSTAFA (Administratrix of the estate of the late Athuman Mabenga)………………….………………...……..………..……………………APPLICANT VERSUS FARAJA SUDI……………………..….…..…………………………………RESPONDENT RULING 19th June & 19th June, 2024. Kilekamajenga, J. Before this court, the applicant is seeking extension of time to challenge the decision of the District Land and Housing Tribunal of Ukerewe which was delivered on 09th November 2023. The application is brought by way of chamber application supported with and affidavit of the applicant. The application was made under section 41(2) of the Land Disputes Courts Act, Cap. 216 RE 2019; section 14(1) of the Law of Limitation Act, Cap. 89 RE 2019 and section 95 of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap. 33 RE 33 RE 2019 together with other enabling provisions of the law. In response, the respondent resisted the application by filing a counter affidavit. 1 During the hearing of the application, the applicant prayed to adopt the affidavit in support of the application and further clarified that the delay was occasioned by the delayed copy of proceedings and the decision of the trial tribunal. She humbly prayed for the application to be allowed. The respondent resisted the application arguing that, the delay was caused by the applicant’s inaction to get the copy of the decision from the trial tribunal. This being an application for an extension of time, the major factor to warrant the extension of time is whether or not the applicant has advanced sufficient cause for the delay. An extension of time may not be granted unless the applicant has advanced good reason for the delay. See, the cases of Sospter Lulenga v. Republic, Criminal Appeal No. 107 of 2006, Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dodoma (unreported); Aidan Chale v. Republic, Criminal Appeal No. 130 of 2003, Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Mbeya (unreported) and Shanti v. Hindochi and Others [1973] EA 207. Though extension of time is within the discretion of the court, such discretion may be exercised judiciously upon good cause for the day. However, there is no exhaustive list on what amounts to sufficient cause. The court must measure on a number of factors to determine the applicant’s good cause. In the case of Tanga 2 Cement Co. v. Jummanne Masangwa and Another, Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2001 (unreported) the Court of Appeal stated that: “This unfettered discretion of the court, however, has to be exercised judicially, and the overriding consideration is that there must be ‘sufficient cause’ for doing so. What amounts to sufficient cause has not been defined. From decided cases a number of factors has been taken into account, including whether or not the application was brought promptly: the absence of any valid explanation for the delay: and lack of diligence on the part of the applicant.” In this application, the applicant blamed the trial tribunal for delaying the copy of the decision. The impugned decision was delivered on 09th November 2023. The applicant had not received a copy of the decision leading to his reminder letter on 04th December 2023. The copy of the decision was issued to the applicant on 28th December 2023 and time to appeal to this court had already elapsed hence this application. This court has gone further to consider factors warranting an extension of time thus: (a) The applicant must account for all the period of delay; (b) The delay should not be inordinate; (c) The applicant must show diligence, and not apathy, negligence or sloppiness in the prosecution of the action that he intends to take; 3 (d) If the court feels that there are other sufficient reasons, such as the existence of a point of law of sufficient importance; such as the illegality of the decision sought to be challenged. The case of Lyamuya Construction Company Limited v. Board of Registered Trustee of Young Women Christian Association of Tanzania, Civil Application No. 2 of 2010, CAT at Arusha. In this application, I find the applicant to have accounted for the days of delay. Also, the delay was not inordinate and the applicant cannot be condemned for negligence. I find the applicant to have advanced sufficient reason to compel this court to exercise its discretion. I hereby allow the application and order the applicant to file the intended appeal within 30 days from the date of this order. Costs of the application to follow in the course. Order accordingly. DATED at Mwanza this 19th Day of June 2024. Ntemi N. Kilekamajenga. JUDGE 19/06/2024 4 Court: The ruling was delivered on this 19th Day of June 2024 in the presence of the applicant and respondent all present in person. Right of appeal explained to the parties. Ntemi N. Kilekamajenga. JUDGE 19/06/2024 5