Aloys Rwehabura Rugazia vs Parfectus Rutenganya (Civil Appeal No. 727 of 2025) [2026] TZCA 266 (6 March 2026)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT PAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: SEHEL. J.A.. MGONYA J.A. And KHAMIS J.A.^ CIVIL APPEAL NO. 727 OF 2025 ALOYS RWEHABURA RUGAZIA................................................................APPELLANT VERSUS PARFECTUS RUTENGANYA (as Executor of the Estate of PROJEST ALOYS RUGAZIA ................................................................ RESPONDENT (Appeal from the decision of the High Court of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam Temeke Sub-Registry, One Stop Judicial Centre at Dar es Salaam) (Sarwattkazi. J.) dated the 13th day of February, 2025 in Misc. Civil Application No. 25152 of 2024 Emanating from Probate and Administration of Estate Cause No. 16 of 2022 RULING OF THE COURT 2&h February & OP March, 2026 MGONYA. 3.A.: This appeal is against the ruling and drawn order of the High Court of Tanzania (Temeke Sub-Registry) at Dar es Salaam, dated 13th February, 2025, in Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 25152 of 2024. In that application, Aloys Rwehabura Rugazia moved the High Court for an order to revoke the appointment of Perfectus Rutenganya as executor of the estate of the late Projest Aloys Rugazia, and instead, the Administrator General be appointed to administer the deceased's estate. He further beseeched the High Court for an order that, the respondent be ordered to account for all actions undertaken while executing the estate. i Upon hearing, the High Court found that the appellant failed to exhibit good cause to revoke its previous order; hence, the application was dismissed for want of merit. Dissatisfied with the decision, the appellant preferred this appeal, raising six grounds of appeal. For reasons that will shortly become apparent, we find no need to reproduce those grounds. When the appeal came up for hearing, Mr. Jeremia Mtobesya, learned counsel, appeared for the appellant, whereas Mr. Thomas Eustace Rwebangira, also learned counsel, appeared for the respondent. Before the hearing could commence, we found it prudent to invite the counsel for the parties to address us on the competency of the appeal. Our concern was whether the memorandum of appeal was filed in compliance with rule 90(1) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 (the Rules). Our move was based on the record of appeal, which showed that, a notice of appeal was lodged on 19th February, 2025, and the memorandum of appeal was lodged on 24th April, 2025, being more than the 60-days time limit prescribed by the law. In response to the invitation, Mr. Mtobesya rightly contended that, the appeal was filed within time. By referring us to page 6 of the record of appeal, he submitted that a notice of appeal was lodged on 19th February, 2025, and a memorandum of appeal was filed and received electronically on 16th April, 2025, although the appellant encountered some technical issues. It was Mr. Mtobesya's explanation that, due to the said technical issues, which the appellant notified the respondent vide a letter dated 28th April 2025, the hard copy and payment were realized on 24th April 2025. He further submitted that, the date appearing on the memorandum of appeal as the filing date was misleading as the appeal was electronically filed on time. To bolster his submission, Mr. Mtobesya brought to our attention a letter dated 28th April, 2025, attached with a copy of the Tanzania Electronic Case Management System (JoT-eCMS), which was received by the respondent on 29th April, 2025, in which the appellant notified the respondent that he filed an appeal on 16th February, 2025. Premising on his submission, Mr. Mtobesya implored us to find that the appeal was filed within time. On his part, Mr. Rwebangira argued that, the appeal was filed out of time. He submitted that the notice of appeal was filed on 19th February, 2025, of which date the appeal was supposed to be filed within 60 days. He contended further that he inspected the Judiciary Portal in respect of this appeal and found that the appeal with reference No. 202504250000727 was filed on 25th April, 2025 instead of being filed on or before 19th April, 2025 as per the rules. Mr. Rwebangira further challenged the letter by the appellant, contending that, apart from non-disclosure of the alleged technical issues, the electronic data attached to it was also not reliable, as the same bore a different appeal reference number contrary to what is demonstrated in the JoT-eCMS. Like the appellant's counsel, Mr. Rwebangira also produced a copy of the JoT-eCMS record relating to this appeal. Consequently, the learned counsel stressed that the appeal was out of time for 5 days, and that no certificate of delay ws issued to exempt the period of delay. Mr. Rwebangira further submitted that, if the appellant keeps on insisting that the memorandum of appeal was filed on 16th April, 2025, the appeal would still be time-barred, as the same was not served to the respondent in time. Consequently, he implored us to find that the appeal had been filed out of time, and it deserved to be struck out by virtue of rule 90 (1) of the Rules. Having heard the rival submissions from the counsel for the parties, the sole issue for our determination is whether the memorandum of appeal was filed within time. As alluded to above, the appellant's counsel contended that, the appeal was filed within time, as the memorandum of appeal was electronically filed and received on 16th April, 2025, and not on 24th April, 2025, as shown on the record of appeal. Essentially, electronic filing is regulated by the Judicature and Application of Laws (Electronic Filing) Rules, 2018 (GN. No. 148 of 2018) (hereinafter referred to as GN. No. 148 of 2018), whereby rule 8 provides: "All pleadings, petitions, applications, appeals and such other documents shall be filed electronically in accordance with these Rules". At what time is the electronic filing is said to be successfully lodged in Court? Rule 21(1) of GN. No. 148 of 2018, which was prevailing at the time the appeal 4 was lodged, was very clear that, a document shall be considered to have been filed if it is submitted through the electronic filing system before midnight, East African time, on the date it is submitted. Elaborating further on that position, this Court in Fredrick Anthony Mboma v. Bamm Solution Limited & Others (Civil Appeal No. 606 of 2022) [2025] TZCA 790, held that: "The filing process is, as a general rule, taken to be complete upon the filing o f a document in question electronically in terms o f rule 21(1) o f the Electronic Filing Rules and upon payment o f the relevant filing fee for a document". In a bid to prove that the appeal was filed electronically within time, the appellant's counsel relied on a copy of the JoT-eCMS printout, which was attached to his letter sent to the respondent. However, this printout indicates the filing of an unidentified "subsequent document", which was filed on 16th April, 2025, under a notice of appeal with reference number 202502170000584, whereas the electronic reference number of the present appeal is 20250425000727. Crucially, this printout confirms that the memorandum of appeal had not yet been filed as of that date. Conversely, our perusal of the JoT-eCMS printout provided by the respondent, which demonstrates that the appeal with case reference No. 202504250000727 was submitted to this Court on 25th April, 2025, and upon inspecting the JoT-eCMS, explicitly we found that the memorandum of appeal was electronically created on 24th April, 2025 at 14:14 and submitted to this Court on 25th April, 2025. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is clear that the appeal at hand was officially filed on 24th April, 2025. The appellant's reliance on the JoT-eCMS printout is misplaced; the document cited pertains to the notice of appeal rather than the memorandum of appeal. Consequently, we find that the appellant has failed to prove that the memorandum of appeal was filed within the time limit reckoned from 19th February 2025, when a notice of appeal was filed. In the upshot, the appeal is time-barred, and we accordingly struck it out with no order as to costs. DATED at DAR ES SALAAM this 6th day of March, 2026. Ruling delivered this 6th day of March, 2025 in the presence of the Appellant in person, Mr. Thomas Rwebangira, learned counsel for the Respondent, via- Teleconference and Ms. Nise Mwasalemba, Court Clerk, is hereby certified as a true cc B. A. M. SEHEL JUSTICE OF APPEAL L. E. MGONYA JUSTICE OF APPEAL A. S. KHAMIS JUSTICE OF APPEAL