C.D Muganzi and Others vs Presidential Parastatal Sector Reform Commission (PSCR) and Others (Civil Application No. 127 B of 2014) [2015] TZCA 905 (22 September 2015)

.:I • U),v.£1 :;J ..e,..o /"Vd;; ~{;Qt;rv/.L,€" A? ✓ //.J//VC- 1\Jo C::E:f7':€ Re a kfe'; 'R., Su &b- L a.pp)&, co f, · 0 .-, {r 3 !f..} ·~ L/ Cfi /I ti ,v" .J' 0-;£ ~ .P' C?ht.. ..f' { 0-£.LJ-d< I £v LE g (, J c Pc) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 127 B OF 2014 C .. D. MUGANYIZI & OTHERS .................................................. APPLICANTS VERSUS

1. PRESIDENTIAL PARASTATAL SECTOR REFORM COMMISSION (PSCR)
2. D.S. MASHIKU, RECEIVER AND MANAGER ............. RESPONDENTS TANGANYIKA PACKERS LTD
3. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Application for extension of time to file an application for restoration for stay of execution from the decision of the Court of Appeal of Tanzania · at Dar es Salaam) (Mbarouk. Mandia Kaijage. JJJ.A.) Dated 6 th February, 2014 in Civil Application 121 of 2013 RULING 4 th September & 1 st October, 2015 ) MJASIRI, J.A.: This application is made under Rule 10 of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009, (the Court Rules). The applicants C.D. Muganyizi and others are seeking extension of time within which to file an application for restoration of the application for stay of execution, Civil Application No. 121 of 2013 in respect of the decision of the High Court of Tanzania (Land Case 1

No. 3 of 2004 dated June 21, 2013 (De Mello, J.). The application is supported by the affidavit of Simon Dunia filed on his ·own behalf and as a representative of the other applicants. The applicants had filed a representative suit in the High Court. At the hearing of the application the applicants were represented by' ( Mr. Florence Tesha, learned advocate and the respondents had the services of Ms. Ellen Rwijage, learned State Attorney. The learned State Attorney filed a preliminary objection, a notice of which was filed under Rule 4(2) (a) of the Court Rules. The preliminary objection was to the effect that the "Deponent has no legal mandate to affirm on behalf of the Applicants." According to Ms. Rwijage the applicant had no legal mandate to . appear on behalf of the other applicants. The affidavit sworn by Simon Dunia is not valid as he is not a party to this application. She relied on the case of Hamisi Kaka and 78 others, Civil Appeal No. 68 of 2008 (unreported). She submitted that Order I Rule 8(1) of the Civil Procedure Code 1966 (the Civil Procedure Code) is not applicable to this Court. 2

Mr. Tesha on his part argued that this application is a continuation of a case which was dete(mined by the High Court in Misc. Land case No. 3 of 2004. Simon Dunia had the mandate to represent the others. The crucial issue to be determined in this application is whether or not Mr. Muganyizi can represent the other applicants in this case and whether or not Mr. Dunia can file an affidavit in Court on ·behalf of others. Rule 30(1) of the Court Rules provides as follows:- "Subject to the provisions of Rule 31 and 33 a party to any proceedings in the Court may appear in person or by advocate. " The law is clear, Order I Rule 8(1) of the Civil Procedure Code does not apply to this Court. The Court Rules do not provide for representative suits. In this application Mr. Muganyizi is the only applicant, therefore he cannot act for others in a representative capacity. The names of the other applicants are not listed in the application. Mr. bunia is not a party to this application and does not have any mandate to file an affidavit on behalf of 3

... v others who were parties in the High Court proceedings. See - Hamisi Kaka (supra). Given the circumstances, I am inclined to agree with the learned State Attorney. I hereby sustain the preliminary objection and strike out the application. I make no order as to costs. DATED at DAR ES SALAAM this 22 nd day of September, 2015. S. MJASIRI JUSTICE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original. E.F. FUSS! DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT OF APPEAL 4