Malusu Kilina vs Malumbi Mkimbo Appearing by her Lawful Attorney Shinguna (Civil Appeal No. 74 of 1997) [1999] TZHC 149 (18 June 1999)

!J¾;!cqea J • Ui. 'mE.JII.GI! OOVR'.I.t OF T:&ANI4 . AT RliR E§ SAL4'1 -CIVIL .APPEAL NO. 74 OF 199'1' M~ KILI~ • • • • • • • • • • • .APfLT~'f Bffi 1 WEE'.N llil..UMBl MKlJMB() {appearing· qy her wful Att,orney) SHINGUNJ.. .. • .•• • • • • • • • • RULING ------- One Rull.ll!lM Mlmmba• »ow d~~ in;tituted -Oi~ Case R.o 52 -o£' 1997 at the Court of Resident, J!agiat.ra~ at Kisutu. Sh.e was suing .Jsther I<e,alana., ·the respondent .before me. Malus.u Ki.limb-a Slfears that HuJ.J,Unl:l.i .Mlwmbo Yae 9Ul'Vived l,y" her. suit. ~ has, in the coUl'se of time, applied for and was granted letters of ad.alinist:ration to enable her to adlll;i.u.iat~ the ~ -a eeta.tG and litigate on ~ belialf. ng to the a.ffid.avi t evidence of th& eppl.i.c.ant ·her departed r.ela~~ ~ - .Qii ,6th, Oot:beJ:,:-:-1995-· · At: :iji§Lt _;_time a guna J.. a was the deoeaeed. 1 f!l_.ap;c:Iey,_•<): .had .the conduct of p:roceedin before the lower court.· Ilia •agen, ·f' .oo:-,abated l'dlen his p:d.n . . died.. ' The purpose of the instant application, therefore, is for orders that. Mal~ Kilimha-i, appii()ant, ·be stibsti tuted for thoe .;ooeased. so that $ha- mey pQ"SW: the pending appeal. · \ . . . . The l.'spondetit has .a:;se,d .t,ro /j~~in& ,:;st. ~ ap_plicatt-0n. One, that the i~~~ i.e t.,; .. .secondly• thet it is time ... ba;r Th.at raspond.ent swers in her coter affidavit that the application is incompetent because the apeal that we.a :filed cy Shingun-.. .J.--.:Shi:.is. incompetemt as he did .so. l &fu:r the death of his princip• '. Now, as regds the first _objc-tion the ·record of pxoceedings>sliows. that on. 30th ··.4pril, 1997, the suit was clismiss.ed' because- it' was: hetd to 00-4e'sjudicata. 'rt'1ihat is so the suiiJ rama.indJact:i.ve from 6th O·t, 1995,' when the plaintiff ·di-ed. Obvioly the rcie~th ·of -the plaintiff put . to arl ·end the- power of attorney Shiguna J•· Sh±guna had been granted. It . ... ~. • . ; • ·• • ~ t"\ "\ • • • . follows th.at ·the suit. after the death of t::ie pl.a.intiff W)]4. only .be legally . ·. "'·. : . ",; ··.- . . " ,: ... :. ~ '"' .... · .. •. . . ' ... '' . . prosecuted by the administr·for of the estate; · .... -. ... . , ......... .

2 ... Thus whatever· took place after- 6th October, 1995, is invalid., Siilarly since Sbiguna J• Shig;une. had no aathori ty to ·· ihstitllte this appeal, the appeal itself ,is also a nothing. For thEo se reasons there is no valid. appeal before me• Upon the foregoing considerations the proceedings before the subordinate court that wexe held after 6th Octo.ber, 1995, including the oxder by which the suit was dismissed are quashed. On the saJ!le parity, the appeal before me is_ struot _out with costs. The suit shall proceed from where it had reached before the pltiff passed away. The applicant may wish to apply to be· joined as• an administrix, subject· to the· 1aw of limitation. , The need to consider- the second i~e ceases to exist-, Delivered., Applicant: In person Respondent: In person.