IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA

(LAND DIVISION)

ATTANGA

MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO. 45 OF 2019

(Arising from the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Tanga in Land Application No. 93 of 2016)

HASHIM MOHMAMMED MNYALIMA

(Administrator of the estate of the late

MWANTUMA SHAHE MASHI) APPLICANT

VERSUS

MOHAMMED NZAI 1 ST RESPONDENT

BAKARI ZUMO ....----....66.66666666664666666336666666cc.,,, gN RESPONDENT

MWANAHAMISI ZUMO .....-----.......6.66.............,,,3R RESPONDENT

BAKARI NGASHO.....-----..666666666%66663663333663344cc4,,,4F° RESPONDENT

MOHAMMED ATHMANI MBASHIRI 5™ RESPONDENT

RULING

MKA.SIMONGWA, J.

This is an Application for extension of time in which to appeal

against the decision of Tanga District Land Housing Tribunal in

Land Application No. 93 of 2016. The Application which is brought

by Hashim Mohamed Mnyalima (As Administrator of the estate of

the late Mwantumu Shehe Mashi) against Mohamed Nzai, Bakari

Zuma Mwanahamisi Zuma, Bakari Ngasho and Mohammed

Athmani Mbashiri (1, 2¢, 3@, 4h and 5 Respondents) is by way

1

of Chamber Summons filed under the provisions of Section 41 (2) of

the Land Disputes Courts Act [Cap 216 R.E 2002] as amended by

the Written Laws (Miscellaneous Amendment Act No. 2 of 2016) and

it is supported by the Affidavit of Hashim Mohamed Mnyalima.

The Application is contested by the respondents and to that

effect the later filed a joint affidavit.

Going by the Affidavit in support of the Application, the

Applicant avers that he did not timely appeal against the decision

he intends to challenge by appeal as the trial Tribunal did not

timely avail him with the copies of the judgment, decree and

proceedings. The deponent so avers under Paragraph 5 of the

Affidavit which reads as follows:­

"That after I sent the Notice of Intention to Appeal, I and my advocate W. R. Mramba, followed up the copies of judgment, decree and proceedings and as we did not get them, I sent to the Tribunal a first and second reminder in prayer of the said documents photocopies of which are also annexed hereto to form part of this affidavit".

In response to the averment, the Respondents vide paragraph

7 of the Counter Affidavit stated as follows:

"That the 5 paragraph of an affidavit is partly not disputed to the extent of the very documents in relation to the facts however, the rest is disputed in that the purportedly follow ups are subject to proof thereof'

2

I have considered the averments and the submission made by

Mr. Mramba, learned advocate for the Applicant and the second

respondent, who spoke for himself and on behalf of the fellow

Respondents, when appeared before me on the date the Application

came for hearing. In his submission, the 2¢ respondent was recorded saying that:-

"My Lord, I have heard what is submitted by the counsel for the Applicant. It is clear that the Applicant made efforts to have the copies availed to him and that the copies were not timely supplied to him. In this matter the Applicant has to tell the court what is his aim in the matter. However since he is ne in need of appealing, I will have no objection to the application so that he files appeal out of time".

This is a clear no objection to the Application for extension of

time. Parties do agree that the Applicant could not timely appeal

against the decision of the District Land and Housing tribunal in

the matter as he was not timely supplied with the copies of

judgment, decree and proceedings. Section 41 ( 1) of the Land

Disputes Courts Act (Cap 216 R. E 2002] provides for where

appeals and revisions and similar proceedings from or in respect of

any proceedings in the District Land and Housing Tribunal in the

exercise of its original jurisdiction lie, that is to the High Court

(Land Division). Subsection (2) of the Section provides for limitation

period of such appeals and powers of the High Court to extend the

period so limited by the law. The Act does not provide for a specific

3

procedure for appeal in which case, the Civil Procedure Code [Cap

33 R.E 2002] applies.

Under the Code (Order XXXIX Rule 1(1), it is necessary that a

Memorandum of Appeal filed in the High Court be accompanied by

the copy of the Decree and the Judgment from which the Decree is

extracted. As such, where one is delayed by the Court and in this

case the District Land and Housing Tribunals in getting the copies,

that constituted a sufficient or good cause, in terms of Section 41

(2) of the Land Disputes Courts Act which warrants the Court to

invoke its discretionary powers to extend the time limited by the law.

Based on the above discussion, I find merit in this Application.

The same is therefore granted and the time in which to file appeal is

extended for f ourty five days from today.

Dated at Tanga this 14 day of July, 2020.

·ca.. JUDGE

14/07/2020

4

Date: 14/07/2020

Coram: E. J. Mkasimongwa, J.

For Applicant:

For Respondent:

C/C: Alex

Court: The Ruling delivered in Chambers this 14 of July, 2020 in

Present in person

Present in person

the presence of the parties in person.

Right of Appeal Explained

·f i + JUDGE

14/07/2020

5