Trust Engineering Works Limited vs Stanbic Bank Tanzania Limited (Civil Application No. 260/01 of 2024) [2025] TZCA 1271 (12 December 2025)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT PAR ES SALAAM fCORAM: KITUSI. J.A.. KAIRO J.A. And MURUKE. J.A.^ CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 260/01 OF 2024 TRUST ENGIREERING WORKS LIMITED .................................. APPLICANT VERSUS STANBIC BANK TANZANIA LIMITED..................................RESPONDENT (Application from the Judgment and Decree of the High Court of Tanzania Dar es salaam Sub-Registry, at Dar es salaam) ( Kisanva. 3.^ dated the 3rd February, 2023 in Civil Case No. 156 of 2013 R U L IN G O F T H E C O U R T 3rd & 12thDecember, 2025. M U R U K E J.A .: The present application is on the striking out of a notice of appeal under Rule 89(2) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 (the Rules) on the grounds that the respondent has failed to take essential steps in the proceedings as no appeal has been filed and the prescribe time to file the same has lapsed. From the nature of the application before us, it is worth narrating a brief history of the dispute. On 19th day of August, 2016 the High Court of Tanzania Dar es salaam sub- Registry delivered the judgment 1 in respect of Civil Case No. 156 of 2013, Hon. Bongole, J (as he then was) in favour of the applicant. The respondent being aggrieved with the said judgment and decree, on 13th day of September 2016, lodged a Notice of Appeal at the High Court of Tanzania Dar es salaam Sub- Registry at Dar es salaam. Equally so, the respondent wrote a letter to the Deputy Registrar of the High Court, requesting to be supplied with certified copies of the judgment, decree, proceedings and exhibits. Further, on 10th day of October, 2016, the respondent wrote another letter requesting for the modification of the decree in respect of Civil Case No. 156 of 2013 and also, wrote a reminder letter dated 17th day of January, 2017. Further, on 22n d day of October, 2018, the respondent wrote a reminder letter to the High Court to be supplied with the corrected decree, exhibits, proceedings and certificate of delay. On 17th day of October, 2019, the Deputy Registrar of the High Court wrote a letter to the respondent informing her that those copies of judgment, decree, proceedings and exhibits in respect of civil case No. 156 of 2013 were ready for collection. On 12th day of December, 2019, the respondent successfully filed an appeal to this Court, Civil Appeal No. 374 of 2019 of which the record 2 reveals that the Deputy Registrar of the High Court certified the exhibits in respect of Civil Case No. 156 of 2013 on 17th day of October, 2019 and the proceedings were certified on 3rd day of August, 2019. The records of appeal were served to the applicant on 18th December, 2019. On 18th day of March, 2022 the Court delivered the judgment in respect of Civil Appeal No. 374 of 2019, where by the judgment and orders of the High Court in respect of Civil Case No. 156 of 2013 were quashed and set aside and the records were remitted to the High Court to compose the judgment afresh. On 3rd day of February, 2023, the High Court of Tanzania Dar es salaam Sub-registry at Dar es salaam, Hon. Kisanya, J delivered a new judgment in respect of Civil Case No. 156 of 2013, in favour of the applicant partly. The respondent being aggrieved with the said judgment and decree, on 24th day of February, 2023, lodged a Notice of appeal at the High Court of Tanzania Dar es salaam Sub-registry at Dar es salaam and the same was served to the applicant on 27th day of February, 2023. On 17th day of February, 2023 the respondent herein wrote a letter to the Deputy Registrar of the High Court requesting to be 3 supplied with certified copies of the judgment, decree, proceedings and exhibits and same was served to the applicant on 21st day of February, 2023. Further on 8th day of May, 2023 the respondent wrote another letter to the Deputy Registrar of the High Court acknowledging the receipt of certified copies of judgment and decree in respect of Civil Case No. 156 of 2013 and was served to the applicant. Upon being served, the respondent filed reply affidavit showing steps taken specifically at paragraph 5, 6 and 7. More so, informed the Court that there is pending Civil Application No 240/01 of 2023 before the Court, filed by the respondent in due process of exercising her right of appeal yet to be determined. On the hearing date Mr. Hardson Mchau and Mr. Erick Kanga learned counsels, represented the applicant and the respondent respectively. The applicant counsel at the outset adopted Notice of Motion, affidavit in support thereof, and submission earlier filed to be part of his oral submission. His submission went along the affidavit and the written submission insisting on the respondent failure to take necessary steps to file the intended appeal, while referring the Court to the following cases; Casmir Richard Shenkai vs. The Bishop Roman Catholic Diocese of Tanga, Civil Application No. 86 of 2022, (2024) TZCA 332 (8 May 2024) (TanzLII), Tanga City Council and Others vs. Tanga General Industries limited, Civil Application No. 162/12 of 2023, (2024) TZCA 346 (9 May 2024) (TanzLII), Edward Mwakambonja (Legal Representative of Magreth Mkima) vs. Saada Bakari, Civil Application No. 605/01 of 2022 (2024) TZCA 255 (9 April 2024) (TanzLII). The respondent counsel submission was brief but to the point that, having complied with rule 90(5) of the Rules, the respondent was waiting from the Registrar on the requested documents, yet to be supplied. There is nothing more the respondent could have done, citing to us the case of State Oil Tanzania Limited v Equity Bank Tanzania Limited, and Equity bank Kenya Limited. Civil Application No 426/16 of 2022 (unreported). In rejoinder submission, the applicant counsel submitted that the respondent ought to have used the earlier supplied proceedings not to apply for new after composition of the fresh Judgment. After having considered all the circumstances of this matter, and submission by both counsels, there is no dispute between the parties that the respondent has taken essential steps in terms of rule 90(5) of 5 the Rules, what is in dispute is that the respondent ought to have used the earlier supplied proceedings before composition of the fresh judgment. We find it difficult to agree with the applicant counsel on his proposition that the respondent was to use the proceeding supplied earlier, before composition of the fresh Judgment to file the intended appeal. It is after the Judgment dated 3rd February, 2023 where the respondent time to file appeal started to run, including being supplied with requisite documents for appeal purposes. The respondent having complied with rule 90(5) of the Rules cannot be blamed for the act of the Registrar delaying to supply the requested documents. The above notwithstanding, we have noted with serious concern that this is fairly an old dispute, which started way back in 2013, as civil case No 156 of 2013, involving the lease agreement, commercial in nature entered between the parties, way back 2011. The Deputy Registrar of the respective registry should ensure that the requested documents are supplied to the respondent accordingly. 6 For the above reason, we hold that this application has no merit and we dismiss it. In view of the circumstances of this matter, we order that each party bear own costs. DATED at DAR ES SALAAM this 12thday of December, 2025. I. P. KITUSI JUSTICE OF APPEAL L. G. KAIRO JUSTICE OF APPEAL Z. G. MURUKE JUSTICE OF APPEAL Ruling delivered this 12th day of December, 2025 to Mr. Hardson B. Mchau, learned counsel for Applicant, via telephone, in the presence of Ms. Esta Msangi, learned counsel for the Respondent and Ms. Anna Utou, Court Clerk; is hereby certified as a true copy of the original. R. W. CHAUNGU DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT OF APPEAL 7