Ngasala Mwambene vs Anderson Makofi (DC Civil Appeal No. 3 of 1998) [1998] TZHC 2495 (13 December 1998)

.-- ( "C \ 1.J ) ~ OF 1990 VERSUS '.- ____________ ...... RULING lv~~POPO ; J • T'his applic8tin is plagued vii th □ any tiuie l,3pe .,. pr0blews which drm' t seem tn encl f·_,,1E1 the tine when the appe::,11 wns being heard en 25/3/91-i nn which dnt the· learned late I1r. Ndib,";lGma for the then cppcll::mt ( the present res:;::--·:mdent) wh0 failed to turn u:n though ser'iie<i .$Ucll tht tree appGG.l W:16 he3rd in his :absen,,e on 25/3/tLf. :. •n tr.,2 dny 0f judge;1ent 0n f/7/9L too learned Mr. . , I •. ,f,Ii 1 ),--:L.::·:::.1 wc.s pr<;;:=,rnnt oot the lcr,rned 1r Mwongcle was o.bsr:nt whose brief wc1s held hy th, lonrrted l\u:'• Nd.J.oz.!..emai , rcsp;)nd-::nt iinderson s/o Mkofi ho.s raised the pie1.iniLJ,a· . l ' point that the notice of_ al wa filed a.eter t.ne expiratir:-n 0f 14 <laY"S fr:)m atr/'94 vrhcn the judgmen<:. - doli vered .. The le::.!rned Mr. Mbic (.ii.(vr:cte) f0r,the ci:;::iplic::mt Ngc1s2ln s/o Mwamhene h2s 90u.ntered ti:.:1t the juclgcr:2nt was net shcvm when it 1.-·r3s ct~li vered ar-::l whethel" it was delivered in the p.resen,e cf ·:;nc npplicar: c.,- Ti:i.,. c ·,urt record sh""l<IS th2t a.'1Jhough tht:: .:>.pplicant I s

JIIIIIJl:l. ·.llllii,l, .,. ............ 2 by t12 repres.:.,nt--:iti,:::n c:: the l::)·c::: lct,rncd Mr. Ndib"",:1.0:. a .. which The f2ct thnt wh2n filing the nrtice of appenl L wQs not filed 0n 1/8/:;4 the 2pplic.:.1nt did. n,-t cor.1plain tht h2 hadL been n,:-tif iGd by t!:1.e lotc l2:-.1rncd jud -_;c;::ont but he 1clivcty 1te nf th~ nnd that he did not /.. proc22d filing an appl.i.cAticn fer leav0 to file n notice of appeal out of time sh01"1$ that he was t0ld of the judgement of this ,court in time soon a:fte~ it l'KlS ·delivered on 8/7/94. On this b3sis there!cre there is no proper n'"'tice of :pil,e_al f ic~ with.in the time liDit r::f 14 d.sys. technical p0int th::it the notice r·f aplleal s no-t served ' '. . t t · 1 ·er:- --cne: re spond.1::n un 1 now. There is no counter :Jrgu;::;2nt tn thj_s point fi:,r indi:;0( the applicai,(.:.,rlidn 't . . ~ . . ner::ossi t2-ting ti1.c ppli-0Gnt b:::· tnr wi1:h a11,. aPtU·u-.af:io• ::fop leave to file notice of appeal cut of time; .. · Th:1t hl'ls · nr:>t been done.· -- Thereafter, the npp.J..icant prceeeded to prepGre tha record of the g·a-1 fr:, ~~ealing to the Court 0£ ippeal be:fore seeking the leave ,:)f thi::-: c?urt ... T the Court nf lppeal first to ap~eal to the Court of ·•ri::.<:.-::il on a certified point ,.of law until when tb.? lerned -- ....

thorc.)f. -f;;:1...,t 3 his 3.ff idavi t.. I;:;nr;r::mce cf the 1.:1w h<:vinr~ ·~p)licnnt f: 0 ,r 1 · t:::iken the=: ·1-rr ,'1 3 ./... It· · 0 :pp20rs.lthc ::pplic,:i:-1t c-:::'tc.:r 1--:-sing the c'"ise in this .•ippeal before this cr.urt un:ro.irly end wrongly l0st ndvc-cGte confidence in the learned Mr. Mvr·ngole and decided tc c, .\ -L prcceed 0 n his nwn rmd later (n e::i.::;o.ged the learned Mr. Knyangc ( li.dvoc:-::t2) who lnter en declined to proc2ed with the 2pplicntion on ressrns th3t he was the trial Erngistrete whn decided the: mciin suit betw.e0n the parties 10 yeers earlier. 3ince the applicc.mt w,s 2lrcndy aware of the decisi0n cf this c0urt sc0n 8fter it was decided he was brund to file the 2pplicsti0n t0 1ppeal tn te Cnurt ' . . . Li,_:itT'cirT1 1.·,ct I'Jo1 10/1971l But, this o.ppiication W9.s :f'Lled over 1 year l2ter in A.round 1'kver:1ber i95 The very opplic. 0 1tion of the learnecJ.1-1~ Ka)'ange &s the·J!le- It is this tioe wherein lee1rn2d i'1r. Mbise ;,cmts t0 bypass by se8king leo.ve t,::i file an ap.liction :f.-:;r lo ave to 8ppeal rm a certif iate of lnw under an e:-:tcnded time. Now it is 1998.. Tis .case ilJ of J.~ instituted 11 years ngo. Th2ro c0rr1es a time when a party tc a suit must .'..)cc::::pt th::: truth that he has reached the tether of his pu.rsusn-c f0r judicial ,justice,. ii.fter all, he has nc- c::-l2mc2 r:f n success even. if he were nllowed tn file his op~Jlicaticn f'or leavi::: to appeal out of tiL1e because ..• • • /4 i \ .

J 4 -'1 r' -"-'·" t:l1.or2 i$1 gc)O(i (rol..1ncl , __ :f l!::..·_.·t Cl.i.s:-..:lc)se:J. s::: f-sr f8r ,,;... ccrtificte r-,-F' ·.-....!. ncvr fri volcusly bei:i:-1g pursued in cc ·c1rts of law. It is hereby dismissed with costs, E. L. K. MWIPOPO JUDGE 13/12/1998 17/12/1998 .:.!)plic::::nt: Ns;ss2la M.wc1ubene ... Fresent in person escndent: Underson Makofi .9.QQ.RT: Judgement delivered. District Regi$trnr tc) inform the respo::2c.-.::nt 4 JUDGE