D. B Shapriya & Co. Limited and Others vs Kamaka Company Limited & Others (Civil Application No. 748/16 of 2024) [2025] TZCA 1274 (12 December 2025)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT PAR ES SALAAM ( CORAM: KITUSI. J.A.. KAIRO 3.A. And MURUKE J.A.^ CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 748/16 OF 2024 D. B SHAPRIYA & CO. LIMITED ....................................................... 1 st APPLICANT MINESTONE LIMITED..................................................................... 2 n d APPLICANT DYNAMIC MOTORS LIMITED........................................................... 3 r d APPLICANT KISHOR DHANJI SHAPRIYA............................................................ 4™ APPLICANT AMISHI SHAPRIYA......................................................................... 5™ APPLICANT VERSUS KAMAKA COMPANY LIMITED........................................................ 1 st RESPONDENT BARCLAYS BANK (T) LIMITED......................................................2 n d RESPONDENT ABDALLAH MAKATA T/A SENSITIVE AUCTION MART & BROKERS........................................................ 3 r d RESPONDENT OPTATUS CHRISSANTU NDONDE..................................................4 th RESPONDENT (Application to strike out Notice of Appeal arising from the Ruling and Drawn Order of the High Court of Tanzania, Commercial Division at Dar es Salaam) (Aqatho, J.) dated the 24t h day of May, 2024 in Miscellaneous Commercial Application No. 4510 of 2024 RULING OF THE COURT lffh & 12th December, 2025 KITUSI. J.A.: The application came for hearing in the presence of Mr. Fraterine Lawrence Munale, learned advocate representing the applicant. Mr. Bakari Juma, learned advocate who was acting for the first respondent and also holding brief of Mr. Mpaya Kamara, learned advocate for the second and third respondents. There was no proof of service on the fourth respondent. i However, Mr. Juma readily conceded to the application, and on that basis, we grant this application. We proceed to strike out the notice of appeal dated 24th May, 2024 that had sought to challenge the ruling of the High Court in Miscellaneous Commercial Application No. 4510 of 2024. We turn to the issue of costs on which the parties did not agree. In conceding to the application, Mr. Juma prayed that the respondents be spared from payment of costs. Mr. Munale was of the view that the applicant should be awarded costs because the concession has come too late in the day when the applicant has incurred costs towards preparation and prosecution of this application. He further submitted that even the intended appeal was against an order which was interlocutory in nature. In determining this point of costs, we are mindful of the general principle that costs follow the event. It has not been submitted that this case falls in the exception and we are unable to see any. That the applicant incurred costs is beyond controversy because the record bears witness. She prepared this application and even filed a 9- page written submissions in support. We need not pronounce ourselves on whether the intended appeal was on an interlocutory order or not, having granted the order to strike it out. Since it is only the first respondent who lodged the 2 notice of appeal and as the application to have it struck out is uncontested, we hereby strike it out with cost against the first respondent. DATED at DAR ES SALAAM this 12th day of December, 2025. I. P. KITUSI JUSTICE OF APPEAL L.G. KAIRO JUSTICE OF APPEAL Z. G. MURUKE JUSTICE OF APPEAL Order delivered this 12th day of December, 2025 in the presence of Mr. Fraterine Munale, learned counsel for the Applicant and Mr. Bakari Juma, learned counsel for the 1st Respondent, also holding brief for Mr. Mpaya Kamara, learned counsel for the 2n d and 3rd Respondents but in the absence of the 4th Respondent and Ms. Anna Utou, Court clerk, is hereby certified as a