Shabani Hassan vs Kuruthum Yusufu (PC Civil Appeal No. 164 of 1997) [1998] TZHC 2204 (21 August 1998)

KALF.GEYA...t.. ,J. IN. THE HIGH COURT OF TANANIA DAR ES RALAAM DISTRICT REGISTRY AT _J)AR . F.:S.,SALAAM PC CtVIL APPEAL NO, 164 Of 1997 SHABANI HASSAN .................. APPELLANT VERSUS KURUTHUM YUSUFU .... , ............ RESPONDENT F U r. __ J NG When this appeal cafue up for hearing Mr. Mtango, Advocate, J for the Respondent., made a preliminary objectitJn contending that it was incompetent for being out of time as the Notice of Appeal thereof was given on 17\6\97 while the judgement was delivered on 7\3\97. In response, Mr. Magesa, Advocate, for Appellant cotmternd. by saying thilt ;,1] though· the typP.d ctJpy of judgement j n his possess i.on indicated 7 \ 3 \ 97 i:he jm1gP.ment i brn J f was .· delivered on 16\6\97. In reply Mr. Mtangn insisted that we should tread by what is supported by record. I must confess and r.egnt:. Urnt the s.i tuation is much more confusing than what has so far been revealed by the learned Counsel. ,_ Firstly, although the typed copies of judgement are duly signed, by one who is designated as "Honourable Magistrate, F. S. C. Mango'', and d?ted 7\3\97, the original is not signed, npt dr1t(·:H1 ;rnd mm has l.o guesR whet.her j I: wrrn brought: to its finality! Secondly, the said judgement does not indicate when it was delivered. Jn fact, the way it is, it· would be hard to prdve that it has ever been delivered at all. l

.. Thirdly, in all fairnss 1 the said judgement, if it deserve· to be so designated, is jn BO a jumb]ed form and substance 1 that the Appellant rightly mifde as one of his. grounds of Appeal the fol.low:ing, "That the first Appellate CoHrt m:i sdi.:ect.ed itself in wr:iting a judgement which is not jntelligible". A judgement should state points for drtermina t.ion, the decision thereon, the reasons for the decision, and should be pronounced in open Court in the presence of the pRrt:ies; dt1ly signed by the Magistrate and dated. The present judgment. is a mile apart with the above. For the reasons discussed, the District: Court judgment: and the proceedings in the District Court leading thereto are quashed and set aside. Tbe Appeal against the primary court judgement is to be heard afresh before a different Magistrate. Considering the part played by the Court in this mess no order is made~to costs.· Delivered (L. B. Kalegeya) ,JUDGR ([,. ~ JUDGE