Dickson Nyakatra vs Zablon Mwikwabe (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1997) [2000] TZHC 48 (31 October 2000)

• ...... t IN THE HIGH COURT OF TII.NZA.NfA AT MWANZA APPELIATE JURISDIOI1ION (Mwnza Registry) HIGH COURT CIVIL APPEAL l''l. 2 OF 1997 . .• ~ r- ~ ~ ' ' .. . . . ;) : ' J... (Originating frd: Bunda District ·coUrt Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1993 ~ Before P.-0. Ang' u1o, Esq, DM) ' . DICKSON NYAKIURA. APPELIANl' VERSUS: ZA.BLON MWIDJABE RESPO IDE NL' JUDGEMENI' MREMA., JUDGE . ,. Dickson Nyakaira, herein referred to as 'the appel).ant'; was·• the plaintiff in the .District Court Civil. Case Noo 7/1993, at Bunda District Court. He sued the Defendant for the recovery of·his radio valued at shs.16o 1 000/- 1 which got lost while the Plaintiff was travelling in the defenda.nt 1 s bus to Kiabaka.ri 9 in·· Bunda District. The learned trial District Magistrate Mr" Ang 1 ulo_ was not saitt8fied 1 on the pre- .. ponderance. of, e_vip.ence, that_ the.Appe;I.lant (Plaintiff) estblished his ~ '• ~ .1., ·- . t ' . . " . claim. He aoubted on the evidence whether ii: was' true in fact that the appellant had the said' raclio' in the' bus. M th' the' result he dismissed the suit with costs .to the respondent, . Dissatisfied. with the finaing and order the appellant lodged the present appeal. The respondent, through l:iis ·advocate Mr. Byabus~, learned ·counsel; besides opposing the grounds of appeai, filed cross..e.ppeaJ..' .. . . .; ~ . ~ . . , . ,... . .. In the latter exercise the learned counsel raised n issue pertaining a • ..; ' .> •' .. ,-! • ' .. • C • ..: ~ ~ • • J ~ • ; • ' \ • ., , to the jurisdiction of the·trial'magistrate Mr-. P Ang•ulo. 'He has challnged the· jurisdction of the trial ·magistrate i?{that at the t'!me he tried the suit he s icanpetent to do, s6 because: ·he· as riot. Ft irli - M3gistrate· within the meaning ·accoded ·uqer tha efihation provicie'ii 'by "iE/ctio 2 df the Mgi'stats1 cadrts Act, _',fot Ndo<'; f' i984 '·~ction 2 ~ ... . ' ~ . of the Act provides,· and I quote:- ._j

• 2 . . . . "2• "Civil Magistra tell means a resident mo.gistro te,. and such other m.:16a:strate as the .. Chief Justice m& . . ;zt . appoint, i ther ._generally _. or . in re spct of . riri.y ·' ·· proceeding or· category of proceedings, tC? l?e a civil .magist-rate'.'••· (nderlined to provide emphass). A~:-MJ;-. ,.ADS" ulo wns nqt and, to do.te. he ·i~ _ n<;,t, a resident magistrate 1 . . ,'. . ;· ·, ·-~ .. '. . . . . . .-, . . . - . . . . : . . .- . : ·.. .. ' , . '•. . •.; ~ : . : ,· he. could only be 11 a civil rtingis3:ote": m:m being "other magistrate'', if ' • ... • '!' • - ' • • • • . . ' he-a.s so ap?oined by.the Chief Justice genez:l_ls 'He could-alsq,,b& ao specially appointed· by the Chief .. Justicl:3 .to hear nnd determine a particular case or Jroceed:tng which ·is in .the nnt~·e of ·a} ci,vil'>c]Aim . . . ·or complaint.'. I ·m.ve peruse~ the Government Notics,'·· to wit\G;_-N. No. 212 of 1984, G·N. No. 495/1990 and the G. N. It>, 50 of 1992 nnd I run satisfied that .the. fril magistrate Mr. P,Oo Anglulo· is:. not among those Magistrate in the Sohed\lle~ to .the espective Notices ·appointed by the .... . .. . . . · Chief Justice by. virtue of th po0ers conferred on '.him' ·by .se:tiJn:· 15 ... . ....: .·.'i'. •• - (2) of the M.c.A, Act fue2 of 1984. The next Goverrmerit·"No.t:foe tlw.t oame after the G. Ne No,50 of 1992 is the GN. It>~ 4~ :,of ,1996, Mr, P, O,. Anglulo . ·:·· . ·t=··.,.Cf·· .. .:· o'/.'·'. .·. ;· .·· : __ ._ .... .. J:..!. . o.i}p:.a,rs on the item r-e.- 48 of the Schedule to·the ).att.er Goyt. Notice which , . ·-::,; /•' -:•r·· . . . ·. \ ::\ -. was publhed on 29/11/1996. Hi .irll juriS'dict}pn: \hrefre canmenced -_: ___ .. on 29/11/2000 ·n.nd not before., Also there isypo, evidece that shows that _. : - :··. - .f:. __ , : _;:·<-·- -~- .tfr.-: c.r _:. .i ~ •. the-Mag;istra.te was appointed by the Chief Justice specifically to per:t'orm the f:1nctioti .:of appropriate judicial Officer as Qj..vil ma5ietrate within _ the meaning)f- section 15 - (2) of the M,c.A, 1984 --- so as to .: . ' . ~ . .,.. ' empower him tb·heo.r and determine Civil Case rb, 7/1993 in the District, at Bunda, Clearly, .therefore, the trial magistrnte did not mve jurisdiction to entertain the suit• The proceedings nnd judgement entertained by him were n nullity and under the circumstances I he·reby exerci'se the powers of revision conferred on me.by the provisions of section 44" (1) (b) of the Magistrates• Courts Act, Act-No 2 of:1984 and revise the whole proceedings in the District Court, declaring them null and void. In the result I hereby quo.sh the de.cision of the district court .as well as the proceedings upon which the judgement and over were·, based. I would therefore

... ::i . ... ... , ..;' . -'/i: L:'.:. _: .. _ ~ ... : direct tint lhe suit to /C~mence e novo before the same di;trict court · 1

.. ;;, ,.,. s..nd before o.-th~: Dirict M3gistrnte 1 or any rp'.lgistrnte of competent ," ,. ·. : .- , I,. l" .. into consideratio , :.,, ·31/lo/2000 :l· ... '. 31/10/2000 in ·te ~~~sence of Mro Rμtaisir_e; le?.-rned· advocat:e: fo.r the Respondent, o.nd the ·-. "G '• ?:if) . -~ . :•• · -"' .;,.,• .. . ' Ii '.:.') ~· .,,.., t ..... J1IDGE ... ,.,. ~