Gererosa Tabara vs Steohen H. Mwamkoa (Civil Case No. 297 of 1998) [2000] TZHC 198 (10 October 2000)

-; ··- ' - IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANU-JUA (DAR ES SAL/v\M DIS'nHCT REGI$TRY) + AT DAR IB°• St..LAA.t'vJ · CIVIL CASE NO. 297 OF 1998 G:B.'RERO,Sli. T1'IB,"IRA Versus STEDH:EN H. MWl1MKOA RULING ----:.-. .... PLAINTIFF DEFENDi'NT Mr. c;. Tenga. advocate for the plaintiff has made an oral application in :terms of Oder XXIII of the Civil Procedure Code for leave to withdraw th ,__uit at this stage with liberty to institute a fresh suit aftr we.rd.a. Mro Tenga ba,3 informed the court that there are important documents lmom to both parties which need to accompany the pl-9.int o Mr. Uk:wonga learned Advocate for tho defendant-surprised by the turn of events a±-gues that §ub Rule 2 of Order XXIII requires that the plaintiff' has to satisfy the court of the existence of sufficient reason for leave to withdraw with liberty to file a fresh suit Mrt Ubronga f-trther argues that Mr. Tenga has not advanced or disclosed any sufficient reason for the applice.tion thus rendering the application untene.ble 0 It is common ground tha.t Order XXIII allows a plaintiff to apply far lave to withdraw his suit with lf-berty to file a fresh one. It fa equally true that the Order in question demands thut tr,e appl:i.ca.+.ion ½.t:1.s to sat:i.£-:fy tn8 ;;.:Yurt for :f. t to grant leave in the :p8.ri:il..!ular caset Mr- .. Ter.g-.2, inform~ the cou:ct that there are important d-::,c1.mwnts known to l,oth thr.~ par·tie,'c: ,hich r..eecl t:J ecompany the plaint, a point ·whicr.. .,_n -.i,;y view 111ould Dot pre judicc the defend,::,..'1t ".lpon thG suit bei1.1g filc .. d a fr(.sb. l.:.1 -':Le 2rent I wiJ.l ,ustain the applicatJ.on fc--... leave to withdraw with lib(;:t•t.v ·t;o :fiL:• e. fresh .suit .. l.ccordingly leave to wit:i:}.j1_·9w is granted with liber\y t8 fj_l.e ~~l:'1.s su.i t &fresh as prayed. 'Ihe plaintiff is condemned to pay the costs :fo::.• t1:1e withd.re.wal., s.Ihema JULGE 10/10/2000