Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The applicant lacked standing to object to attachment based on encumbrances; only the secured creditor could object. The executing court acted within its mandate as the consent decree allowed for execution in case of default, and the applicant remained liable for the decretal amount. All grounds lacked merit.
Source excerpt
The court found that the parties had lawfully settled the matter and, in accordance with the Civil Procedure Code, recorded the deed of settlement as a decree of the court, thereby disposing of the application.
Source excerpt
The respondent satisfied the consent judgment by paying the decreed sum and vacating the land, including dismantling the tower. The basement and flooring were not ordered to be removed in the decree or consent judgment, and the appellant accepted possession without complaint for years. The executing court cannot grant relief not contained in the decree. Compensation for alleged illegal occupation was not part of the consent judgment or decree and cannot be awarded in execution proceedings.
Source excerpt
Since execution orders are not among the orders appealable under Order XL Rule 1 and sections 74 and 75 of the Civil Procedure Code, and appeals do not lie from consent judgments, the appeal is incompetent and must be dismissed.
Source excerpt
The High Court was properly moved to issue a certificate under section 16 of the Government Proceedings Act, and erred in law by failing to exercise its jurisdiction to hear and determine the application on merit after overruling the preliminary objection. The application should have been determined on its merits by another judge.
Source excerpt
Appeal over a consent judgment challenge dismissed because the separate suit was improper in the circumstances.
The High Court certified two points of law for appeal on how a consent judgment allegedly procured by fraud or coercion may be challenged, and whether the suit was still pending.
The Court of Appeal held that revision cannot replace an omitted appeal and dismissed the application as incompetent and time-barred.
Explore more
