In this application made under Rule 11 (2) (b) of the Court of. Appeal Rules, 2009, the applicant, Indian Ocean Hotels Ltd. t/a
|
|
- Baldric Gray
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: RUTAKANGWA, J.A., MBAROUK, J.A., And MASSATI, J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 82 A OF 2010 INDIAN OCEAN HOTELS LTD. t/a GOLDEN TULIP DAR ES SALAAM APPLICANT VERSUS NITESH SUCHAK t/a SMART DRY CLEANERS RESPONDENT (Application for Stay of Execution from the judgment of the High Court of Tanzania Commercial Division at Dar es Salaam) 16 th March, & 14 th April, 2011 MBAROUK, J.A.: (Mruma, J.) dated the 18 th day of March, 2010 in Commercial Case No. 87 of RULING OF THE COURT In this application made under Rule 11 (2) (b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009, the applicant, Indian Ocean Hotels Ltd. t/a Golden Tulip Dar es Salaam, is seeking for an order that the execution of the decree in Commercial Case No. 87 of 2006 in the High Court of Tanzania Commercial Division at Dar es Salaam be stayed pending the determination of the intended appeal to this
2 2 Court. The grounds stated in the applicant s notice of motion are that:- (i) The applicant filed a Notice of Appeal and for which she has just obtained the judgment and decree except the proceedings to enable the filing of the appeal record. (ii) The respondent is now moving to execute the decree. (iii) The applicant will suffer irrecoverable economic loss in the event execution proceeds. At the hearing, Mr. D.J. Nyabiri, learned advocate, appeared for the applicant and Mr. Godwin Muganyizi, learned advocate, appeared for the respondent. As collected in the affidavit filed in support of the application sworn by Puneet Bhambi, the background giving rise to the application is as follows: The applicant being dissatisfied with the
3 3 decision of the High Court in Commercial case No. 87 of 2006, (Mruma, J.) dated 18 th March, 2010, decided to file a notice of appeal to challenge the said decision. Having filed the notice on and served a copy to the respondent, the applicant also applied for copies of the judgment, decree and proceedings on for the purpose of lodging her appeal to this Court. Following the Registrar s letter dated 20 th July, 2010 to the applicant s advocates, copies of judgment and decree were ready and supplied to the applicant s advocate on 27 th July, 2010 except proceedings. However, the applicant could not have lodged its appeal to this Court without a record containing proceedings. On 27 th July, 2010 without any delay, the applicant s advocate reminded the Registrar on the necessity to be provided with the proceedings to pursue the intended appeal. Surprisingly, on , the applicant was served with the letter from the Registrar notifying it that an application for execution of the decree in Commercial Case No. 87 of 2006 had been granted. Furthermore, the applicant found from the High Court s Notice Board a Prohibitory Order addressed to it dated in respect of the decree supplied to the applicant s advocate on The
4 4 applicant further stated in the affidavit that a notice of warrant of attachment was served to it for the multi-billion property in the name of INDIAN OCEAN HOTELS LTD. t/a GOLDEN TULIP in the satisfaction of the decree with interest amounting to TShs. 48,523,567/=. As pointed out earlier, this application is made under Rule 11 (2) (b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, In Rule 11 (2) (d), the conditions precedent for granting an order of stay of execution have been unequivocally spelt out. Initially, before the coming into force of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009, the Court mainly relied upon conditions stated in its various decisions for granting stay of execution. This is not the case now, in view of the mandatory Rule 11 (2) (d) which specifically enumerates the conditions precedent to be complied with before the Court grants a stay of execution order. For ease of reference, Rule 11 (2) (d) states as follows:
5 5 No order for stay of execution shall be made under this rule unless the Court is satisfied- (i) that substantial loss may result to the party applying for stay of execution unless the order is made; (ii) (iii) that the application has been made without unreasonable delay; and that security has been given by the applicant for the due performance of such decree or order as may ultimately be binding upon him. (Emphasis added). Currently, we are of the considered opinion that, due to the change of circumstances where the conditions precedent for granting stay of execution have been so specifically stated statutorily, there is no other option but to comply with the provisions of Rule 11 (2) (d).
6 6 In the course of hearing the application, Mr. Nyabiri admitted the fact that the applicant s affidavit in support of the application does not contain facts to substantiate loss to be incurred as stated in Rule 11 (2) (d) (i). He contended however that, it is a well known fact that the hotel being a business premises its occupants may have to vacate if stay of execution will not be granted. He thus submitted that, if these inconveniences will occur, substantial loss will be incurred by the applicant. He further submitted that even if no proof of loss has been stated in the applicant s affidavit, he urged us to take judicial notice that, the hotel attached, is a multi-billion property. On his part, Mr. Muganyizi, submitted that, the applicant s affidavit does not disclose facts on the issue of loss likely to be incurred. He thus urged us to find that condition has not been satisfied. In paragraph 9 of the affidavit, it is asserted that the attached facility is a multi billion property. It is further asserted in paragraph 11 that in the event execution proceeds, the applicant will
7 7 suffer irrecoverable economic loss as a result there of. Although the applicant has not disclosed the current market price of the attached property, it is our considered opinion that the value of a modern hotel of the type of Golden Tulip, all things considered, is much more than T. Shs. 48,523,567/= It s value, therefore, does not correspond with this decretal amount as is required under Order XXI, Rule 15(4) of the Civil Procedure Code Cap. 31 R.E If the hotel is auctioned and the applicant subsequently succeeds on appeal, the loss it will incur, in our considered opinion might, indeed, be substantial and irrecoverable. We accordingly find that the condition stated in Rule 11(2) (d)(i) has been met here. On the second condition, Mr. Nyabiri submitted that the applicant has lodged this application without unreasonable delay. He said, the application was filed on after being provided with copies of judgment, decree and proceedings. He thus urged us to find that the condition stated under Rule 11 (2) (d) (ii) has been satisfied.
8 8 In his reply, Mr. Muganyizi blamed the applicant s advocate and the applicant for not having made a pressing follow up to acquire the proceedings. However, he later left it to the Court to decide on the issue whether there was unreasonable delay in filing the application or not. On this point, we are of the considered opinion that, the applicant showed due diligence in making a follow up with the Registrar so as to be provided with the necessary documents to enable her to lodge this application. The application, therefore, was made without unreasonable delay. As to the condition stated in Rule 11 (2) (d) (iii) on security for the due performance of the decree, Mr. Nyabiri first admitted that it had not been fulfiled, but shifted the blame to the court, because no court has stated the amount of security to be deposited. However, he said, his client is ready to deposit such a security if this Court can state the amount. He thus urged us to issue necessary orders to that
9 9 effect, and invoke Rule 2 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 in the spirit of achieving substantial justice and grant stay of execution. On his part, Mr. Muganyizi submitted that, it is not disputed that the applicant has not deposited any security. He said, security has to be deposited before the hearing of the intended appeal. As to the issue of an amount to be paid, Mr. Muganyizi said, the decree shows the decretal amount, hence the applicant should not shift the blame to the court. Having considered the rival submissions on the issue of security as a condition precedent for granting a stay of execution, we have to consider the principle concerning the right of the decree holder to enjoy the fruits of the judgment and decree which is in his favour. On the other hand, we have also to consider another principle that the judgment debtor has the right to appeal if dissatisfied and so desires to appeal. The Court has to balance the two principles properly to achieve substantive justice.
10 10 Having balanced the two principles stated above, we are of the settled view that the interests of justice will be met if we allow the application for stay of execution subject to depositing into the Court as security for the due performance of the decree, the sum of Tshs. 48,523,567/= within fourteen (14) days from the date of this ruling. Costs will be in the cause. It is so ordered. DATED at DAR ES SALAAM this 22 nd day of March, E.M.K. RUTAKANGWA JUSTICE OF APPEAL M.S. MBAROUK JUSTICE OF APPEAL S.A. MASSATI JUSTICE OF APPEAL I Certify that this is a true copy of the Original. (Z. MARUMA) DEPUTY REGISTRAR
RULING OF THE COURT. The third respondent herein, Elias K. Musiba, used to be an employee
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: RUTAKANGWA, J.A., MBAROUK, J.A., And MASSATI, J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 97 OF 2010 TANZANIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY LTD... APPLICANT VERSUS
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIIVIL APPLICATION NO.111 OF 2006 STANBIC BANK TANZANIA LTD.. APPLICANT VERSUS
1 Civil Application No 111 of 2006 court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam Msoffe, J.A Stanbic Bank Tanzania Ltd Vs Plexus Cotton Ltd (Application for stay of execution from decision of High Court
More informationREGIONAL MANAGER, TANROADS KAGERA.. APPLICANT VERSUS RUAHA CONCRETE COMPANY LIMITED... RESPONDENT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 96 OF 2007 REGIONAL MANAGER, TANROADS KAGERA.. APPLICANT VERSUS RUAHA CONCRETE COMPANY LIMITED.... RESPONDENT (Application for
More informationSELEMANI RAJABU MIZINO... APPLICANT VERSUS 1. SHABIR EBRAHIM BHAIJEE 2. FAYEZA SHABIR BHAIJEE... RESPONDENTS 3. HUZAIRA SHABIR BHAIJEE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 80 OF 2007 In the Matter of an Intended Appeal SELEMANI RAJABU MIZINO... APPLICANT VERSUS 1. SHABIR EBRAHIM BHAIJEE 2. FAYEZA SHABIR
More informationCitation Parties Legal Principles Discussed
1 Citation Parties Legal Principles Discussed CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20 OF 2007- COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM- MSOFFE, J.A, KAJI, J. A; and RUTAKANGWA, J. A. 1. NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION
More informationThis is an application for revision in terms of the provisions of
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ESSALAAM (CORAM: LUBUVA, l.a., MROSO, l.a., And MSOFFE, l.a.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 183 OF 2005 1. ABBAS SHERALLY ] 2. MEHRUNISSA ABBAS SHERALLY ]................
More informationMROSO, J.A., NSEKELA, J.A. And RUTAKANGWA, J.A.) FRANCISCA MBAKILEKI... APPLICANT VERSUS TANZANIA HARBOURS CORPORATION RESPONDENT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: MROSO, J.A., NSEKELA, J.A. And RUTAKANGWA, J.A.) CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 14 OF 2004 FRANCISCA MBAKILEKI. APPLICANT VERSUS TANZANIA HARBOURS CORPORATION
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM. MROSO, J.A., NSEKELA, J.A. And MSOFFE, J.A. CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 3 OF 2007
Citation Parties Legal Principles Discussed CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 3 OF 2007- COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM- MROSO, J.A., NSEKELA, J.A. And MSOFFE, J.A. HARUNA MPANGAOS AND OTHERS Vs. TANZANIA
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CORAM: RAMADHANI, J. A. NSEKELA, J. A. AND KAJI, J. A. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
1 In the Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam Civil Application No. 173 of 2004 KAJI, J.A STELLA TEMU VS TANZANIA REVENUE AUTHORITY (Application for Revenue from the judgement of the Court of Appeal
More informationThis is an application for extension of time within which to lodge an. application for leave to appeal against the decision of the High Court sitting
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: MSOFFE, J.A., RUTAKANGWA, J.A., And LUANDA, J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 182 A OF 2007 SELINA CHIBAGO... APPLICANT VERSUS FINIHAS CHIBAGO... RESPONDENT
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT OAR ES SALAAM. (CORAM: KIMARO,J.A., MASSATI,J.A., And MUGASHA,J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT OAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: KIMARO,J.A., MASSATI,J.A., And MUGASHA,J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 171 OF 2015 1. JOHN PAUL SHIBUDA ~ 2.TANZANIAINTERNATIONA AGRI INPUT CO-L
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM
Citation Parties Legal Principles Discussed TANZANIA SEWING MACHINES COMPANY LIMITED Vs. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.56 of 2007 Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam. Munuo, J.A MJAKE ENTERPRISES LIMITED.
More informationThe appellants, through the services of the Women's Legal Aid. Centre (WLAC) lodged the present appeal to challenge the dismissal of
1 IN THE COURTOF APPEALOF TANZANIA AT OAR ESSALAAM (CORAM: RAMAOHANI, C.l., MUNUO, l.a., RUTAKANGWA, l.a., KIMARO, l.a., And BWANA, l.a.) CIVIL APPEAL NO.4 OF 2007 ELIZABETH STEPHEN 1ST APPELLANT SALOME
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM REVISION NO 305 OF 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM REVISION NO 305 OF 2010 TANZANIA BUILDING WORKS LTD. APPLICANT VERSUS ALLY MGOMBA & 4 OTHERS RESPONDENTS (Original CMA/DSM/TEM/337/09) 17/09/2012
More informationELIGI EDWARD MASSAWE AND THREE OTHERS (On behalf of 104 others)..applicants ATTORNEY GENERAL AND TWO OTHERS...RESPONDENTS
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: MUNUO, J.A., MSOFFE, J.A. And KAJI, J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 75 OF 2006 ELIGI EDWARD MASSAWE AND THREE OTHERS (On behalf of 104 others)..applicants
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM. (CORAM: MROSO, J. A, MSOFFE, J. A. AND KAJI, J. A.) CIVIL REFERECE NO.
1 Civil Reference No 14 of 2005 Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam. Mroso, J.A, Msoffe, J.A and Kaji, J.A Philip Chumbuka VS. Masudi Ally Kasele (Appeal from the Judgement Decision of the Appeal
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (OAR ES SALAAM DISTRICT REGISTRY) AT OAR ES SALAAM MISC. CIVIL CAUSE NO.157 OF 2005 ELIZABETH AUGUSTINO SAID PETITIONER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (OAR ES SALAAM DISTRICT REGISTRY) AT OAR ES SALAAM MISC. CIVIL CAUSE NO.157 OF 2005 ELIZABETH AUGUSTINO SAID PETITIONER VERSUS 1. OYSTERBAY PROPERTIES LTD 1 st RESPONDENT
More informationappeal, it is desirable to state the following, albeit briefly.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: MSOFFE, J.A.; BWANA, J.A. AND MANDIA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9 OF 2008 SHENGENA LTD...... APPELLANT VERSUS 1. NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION
More information(CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A., MROSO, J.A. And MUNUO, J.A.)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A., MROSO, J.A. And MUNUO, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 152 OF 2004 VICTOR FRANK ISHEBABI (a person of weak mind by his next friend) MAHAMOUD
More information1. YUSUFU SAME 2. HAWA DADA APPELLANTS VERSUS
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CORAM: MUNUO, J,A. KAJI. J.A. AND KIMARO, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1 OF 2002 1. YUSUFU SAME 2. HAWA DADA APPELLANTS VERSUS HADIJA YUSUFU RESPONDENT (Appeal
More informationTANZANIA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD...APPLICANT/J.DEBTOR INTEREBEST INVESTMENT CO. LIMITED.RESPONDENT/D. HOLDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (DAR ES SALAAM DISTRICT REGISTRY) AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL CASE NO. 68 OF 2000 TANZANIA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD....APPLICANT/J.DEBTOR VERSUS INTEREBEST INVESTMENT CO. LIMITED.RESPONDENT/D.
More informationIn the High Court of Tanzania at Mwanza the appellant and two. others were charged with murder c/s 196 of the Penal Code. It was
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MWANZA (CORAM: SAMATTA, C.J., MSOFFE, J.A., And KAJI, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 42 OF 2001 JUMA LYAMWIWE THE REPUBLIC VERSUS APPELLANT RESPONDENT 16/2/2005 & 28/4/2006
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: SAMATTA, C.J, MUNUO,J, A, AND RUTAKANGWA, J, A.)
Citation Parties Legal Principles Discussed SULTAN S/O Non-compliance with the MOHAMED VS provisions of section 240 (3) of the THE REPUBLIC. Criminal Procedure Act, Cap 20 (Appeal from the R.E 2002 is
More information1 ST ADILI BANCORP LIMITED.APPELLANT VERSUS ISSA HUSSEIN SAMMA...RESPONDENT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A., MROSO, J.A. And MUNUO, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 78 OF 2006 1 ST ADILI BANCORP LIMITED.APPELLANT VERSUS ISSA HUSSEIN SAMMA....RESPONDENT
More information(CORAM: NSEKELA, J.A., KILEO, J.A. And BWANA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2008
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: NSEKELA, J.A., KILEO, J.A. And BWANA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2008 AGNESS SIMBAMBILI GABBA. APPELLANT VERSUS DAVID SAMSON GABBA RESPONDENT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA COMMERCIAL DIVISION AT OAR ES SALAAM MISC.COMMERCIAL CAUSE NO.70 OF 2013 VERSUS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA COMMERCIAL DIVISION AT OAR ES SALAAM MISC.COMMERCIAL CAUSE NO.70 OF 2013 1. ANDREW WISTON KALELA NDIMBO 1 st APPLICANT 2. CHRISTINA ANDREW NDIMBO 2 nd APPLICANT VERSUS 1.
More information(Application for stay of execution from the decision of the High Court of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPLICATION NO 82 OF 2008 NATIONAL HOUSING CORPORATION. APPLICANT AND HAMISI LUSWAGA... 1 ST RESPONDENT PETER KASIDI..2 ND RESPONDENT CHRISTOPHER
More information(CORAM: RAMADHANI, C.J., MROSO, J.A. And KAJI, J.A.) 1. JOSEPH CHUWA 2. HASHIM MOTTO.. APPELLANTS VERSUS THE REPUBLIC.RESPONDENT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT ARUSHA (CORAM: RAMADHANI, C.J., MROSO, J.A. And KAJI, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 75 OF 2006 1. JOSEPH CHUWA 2. HASHIM MOTTO.. APPELLANTS VERSUS THE REPUBLIC.RESPONDENT
More informationSTAY OF EXECUTION-whether the application has been overtakenusually,
Citation Parties Legal Principles Discussed 1. SHABIR EBRAHIM BHAIJEE 2. FAZA SHABIR BHAIJEE 3. HUZAIRA SHABIR BHAIJEE Vs. 1. SELEMANI RAJABU MIZINO, 2. REGISTRAR OF TITLES- CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 40 OF
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM ALLAN T. MATERU APPELLANT / APPLICANT VERSUS AKIBA COMMERCIAL BANK... RESPONDENT
..... --...,:. IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM ALLAN T. MATERU APPELLANT / APPLICANT VERSUS AKIBA COMMERCIAL BANK... RESPONDENT The applicant, Allan Materu, sued his former employer, Akiba
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OFT AN ZAN IA (COMMERCIAL DIVTSfON) AT DAR ES SALAAM
IN THE HIGH COURT OFT AN ZAN IA (COMMERCIAL DIVTSfON) AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC COMMERCIAL CAUSE NO 70 OF 2017 (ARISING FROM COMMERCIAL CASE NO. 127 OF 2016) BETWEEN MAN TRAC T ANZANTA LIMITED --------------------------------------------A
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL RULES, 1997 (C.I 19)
COURT OF APPEAL RULES, 1997 (C.I 19) IN exercise of the powers conferred on the Rules of Court Committee by Article 157(2) of the Constitution these Rules are made this 24th day of July, 1997. PART I-GENERAL
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPEAL NO. 36 OF 2003 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPEAL NO. 36 OF 2003 (From the Ruling of The Court of the Resident Magistrate at Kisutu in Civil Case No.78 of 1997 Mgetta, ISSA. H. NANGUPECHI. SRM)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM RULING
/".1", IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL CASE NO. 311 OF 1999 MWENGE GAS AND LUB OIL LTD PLAINTIFF VERSUS UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM DEFENDANT RULING A.Shangwa,J. On 17/8/1999, DR.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 28 OF 2014 URSINO PALMS ESTATE LIMITED... APPLICANT VERSUS 1. KYELA VALLEY FOODS LTD.................... lst RESPONDENT 2. THE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM RULING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL REVISION NO. 57 OF 2004 MAH MUD SHAMTE APPLICANT VERSUS MARY SHAMTE RESPONDENT RULING A. Shangwa,J. On 14 th May, 2004, learned counsel for the applicant
More informationStay on Execution: When & How
Stay on Execution: When & How by Rakesh Kumar Singh ************** Decade is a normal time period if one is to ask a plaintiff of a civil suit more particularly he who wants to get the possession of his
More informationGOVERNMENT NOTICE NO published on. THE APPELLATE JURISDICTION ACT (CAP.141) RULES. (fv1ade under section 12) THE TANZANI COURT OF APPEAL RULES, 2009
GOVERNMENT NOTICE NO published on. THE APPELLATE JURISDICTION ACT (CAP.141) RULES (fv1ade under section 12) THE TANZANI COURT OF APPEAL RULES, 2009 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES CITATION PART 1 AND INTERPRET ATION
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL REFERENCE NO.12 OF 2004 DAVID MWAKIKUNGA. APPELANT VERSUS
1 Civil reference No.12 of 2004 Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam. Munuo, J.A, Kaji, J.A and Kimaro. David Mwakikunga Vs Mzumbe University (inccessor of the title of IDM Mzumbe) (Reference from
More informationCivil Appeal No 4 of 2003 in the court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam
1 Civil Appeal No 4 of 2003 in the court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam DAHABURALI E. SHAMJI TADEMA OVERSEAS LIMITED Vs. 1. The Treasury Registrar Ministry of Finance Tanzania. 2. The Attorney
More informationIN THE FAIR COMPETITION TRIBUNAL AT DAR ES SALAAM TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2013 TANZANIA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD...APPELLANT VERSUS JUDGMENT
IN THE FAIR COMPETITION TRIBUNAL AT DAR ES SALAAM TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2013 TANZANIA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD...APPELLANT VERSUS MS. ELIZABETH KIUNSI 1 ST RESPONDENT ENERGY AND WATER UTILITIES REGULATORY
More informationAn Act to amend the Land Ordinance and the Land (Law of Property and Conveyancing) Ordinance
THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA No. 28 OF 1970 I ASSENT, 25TH JULY, 1970 An Act to amend the Land Ordinance and the Land (Law of Property and Conveyancing) Ordinance [25TH JULY, 1970] ENACTED by the Parliament
More informationIn the Resident Magistrate Court of Shinyanga sitting at Shinyanga, the appellant KAUNGUZA S/O MACHEMBA was charged with four counts.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT TABORA (CORAM: LUANDA, J.A., ORIYO, J.A., And KAIJAGE, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 157B OF 2013 KAUNGUZA S/O MACHEMBA... APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC... RESPONDENT
More informationAr_JlAB K~ ~bij.bb.m
/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA Ar_JlAB K~ ~bij.bb.m CIVIL CASE NO. 247 OF 1997 BASIL NICHOLAS ALEXANDER JENNINGS BRAMLY VERSUS 1. PHOKION FILIOS 2. A & F CONTRACTORS 3. EXPO TANZANIA LTD LTD. KAI!Rm~..x_A-,--.J._L
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM VICTOR SUNGURA TOKE... APPLICANT VERSUS P.S.R.C & BOARD OF INTERNAL TRADE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM VICTOR SUNGURA TOKE...... APPLICANT VERSUS P.S.R.C & BOARD OF INTERNAL TRADE RESPONDENT Date of last Order: Date of Ruling : 09/04/2008 The PSRC and the BOARD
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2015] NZHC 92 JUDGMENT OF PETERS J
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2014-404-3052 [2015] NZHC 92 UNDER IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND the Land Transfer Act 1952 of caveat 9360334.1 ASTON INVESTMENTS LIMITED Applicant KERVUS
More informationJUDICIARY OF TANZANIA
JUDICIARY OF TANZANIA HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA COMMERCIAL DIVISION 1 Contents 1. Introduction...4 2. Historical Background of the Commercial Court of Tanzania...5 2.1. Establishment of the Court...5 2.2.
More informationknown as plot number 13 Glynham, Masvingo ( the property ). It formed part of the estate
1 DISTRIBUTABLE (29) ALFRED MUCHINI v (1) ELIZABETH MARY ADAMS (2) SHEPHERD MAKONYERE N.O (3) ESTATE LATE ALVIN ROY ADAMS (4) REGISTRAR OF DEEDS (5) MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT SUPREME COURT OF ZIMBABWE ZIYAMBI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. CS (OS) No of Versus CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR O R D E R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No. 2206 of 2012 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pravin Anand, Ms. Vaishali Mittal,
More informationTHE SUMATRA (COMPLAINTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURE) RULES, 2008
THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA THE SUMATRA (COMPLAINTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURE) RULES, 2008 [GN. No. 15 OF 2008] PRINTED BYTHE GOVERNMENT PRINTER, DAR ES SALAAM-TANZANIA ANDAND THE SUMATRA (COMPLAINTS AND
More information(CORAM: MUNUO, J.A., KILEO, J.A. And LUANDA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 75 OF 2008
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: MUNUO, J.A., KILEO, J.A. And LUANDA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 75 OF 2008 1. MIRE ARTAN ISMAIL....1 ST APPELLANT 2. ZAINABU MZEE...2 ND APPELLANT
More informationLUBUVA, J.A., MUNUO, J.A. And NSEKELA, J.A.) RAHEL MBUYA... APPELLANT VERSUS 1. MINISTER FOR LABOUR AND YOUTH
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A., MUNUO, J.A. And NSEKELA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 121 OF 2005 RAHEL MBUYA..... APPELLANT VERSUS 1. MINISTER FOR LABOUR AND YOUTH
More informationJOHN NAIMAN MUSHI APPELLANT VERSUS KOMBO RURAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED RESPONDENT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT ARUSHA (CORAM KAJI,J.A., KILEO,J.A., And KIMARO,J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 45 OF 2006 JOHN NAIMAN MUSHI APPELLANT VERSUS KOMBO RURAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED RESPONDENT
More informationIN THE MATTER OF ANA PPLIATION FOR PREROGATIVE ORDERS OFCERTIORARI AND MANDAMUS BY ADELINA CHUGULU AND 99 OTHERS
IN THE MATTER OF ANA PPLIATION FOR PREROGATIVE ORDERS OFCERTIORARI AND MANDAMUS BY ADELINA CHUGULU AND 99 OTHERS IN THE MATTER OF REVISION OF THE DECISION OF THE NATIONAL EXAMINATION COUNCIL OF TANZANIA
More informationMelbourne Deputy President C. Aird Directions Hearing
VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DIVISION DOMESTIC BUILDING LIST VCAT REFERENCE NO. D134/2006 CATCHWORDS Costs offers of settlement whether offers should have been accepted - whether order
More informationAT DODOMA. (CORAM: MSOFFE,J.A., RUTAKANGWA,J.A. And BWANA,J.A.) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4 OF 2007 KARIM KIARA...APPLLICANT VERSUS
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DODOMA CRIMINAL APPLICATIO N NO. 04/2007 BWANA, J.J.A KARIM KIARA VS THE REPUBLIC (from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dodoma by MUNUO, KAJI, KIMARO
More informationAn Act to amend the Employment Ordinance
THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA No. 5 OF 1969 I ASSENT, An Act to amend the Employment Ordinance ENACTED by the Parliament of the United Republic of Tanzania. President FEBRUARY, 1969 [1ST MARCH, 1969]
More informationIn this omnibus application there are two basic prayers. Extension of time to file an application for leave to appeal AND leave
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: MSOFFE, J.A., KILEO, J.A., And BWANA, J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 98 OF 2010 RUTAGATINA C.L. APPLICANT VERSUS 1. THE ADVOCATES COMMITTEE 2. CLAVERY
More informationBETWEEN
REPULIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: TUNOI, O KUBASU & GITHINJI, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 104 OF 2008 (UR. 62/2008) BETWEEN THE HON. JOEL OMAGWA ONYANCHA.. APPLICANT AND
More informationTHE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (COMMERCIAL COURT DIVISION)
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (COMMERCIAL COURT DIVISION) MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 733 OF 2005 (Arising out of H.C.C.S. No. 1018 of 2004) ROSEMARY ELEANOR KARAMAGI
More informationSINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE (SIAC)
GUIDE TO INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE (SIAC) Written By S. Ravi Shankar Advocate on Record - Supreme Court of India National President of Arbitration Bar of India
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM. COMMERCIAL CASE No 72 OF 2017 EQUITY BANK TANZANIA LIMITED PLAINTIFF
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA COMMERCIAL DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM COMMERCIAL CASE No 72 OF 2017 Between EQUITY BANK TANZANIA LIMITED PLAINTIFF Versus HOME CRAFT GROUP (T) LTD 1 st DEFENDANT KARIUKI JOSEPHAT
More informationAT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPEAL NO. 145 OF 2002 MATHEW MBATA...APPLICANT VERSUS DENIS CATHELESS...RESPONDENT RULING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPEAL NO. 145 OF 2002 MATHEW MBATA...APPLICANT VERSUS DENIS CATHELESS...RESPONDENT Date of last order - 29/2/2008 Date of Ruling - 31/03/2008 RULING
More informationTHE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS ACT CHAPTER 408 REVISED EDITION 2006
THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS ACT CHAPTER 408 REVISED EDITION 2006 This edition of the Tax Revenue Appeals Act, Cap. 408 incorporates all amendments up to 30th November, 2006
More informationRAMADHANI, C.J., LUBUVA, J.A. And NSEKELA, J.A.) KAPINGA & COMPANY ADVOCATES... APPELLANT VERSUS NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE LIMITED...
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: RAMADHANI, C.J., LUBUVA, J.A. And NSEKELA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 42 OF 2007 KAPINGA & COMPANY ADVOCATES... APPELLANT VERSUS NATIONAL BANK OF
More information2yh August, Supplement No THE BASIC RIGHTS AND DUTIES ENFORCEMENT (CAP.
ISSN 0856-034X Supplement No. 34 SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION 2yh August, 2014 to the Gazette of the United Republic of Tanzania No. 35 Vol 95 dated 2cjh August, 2014 Printed by the Government Printer, Dar es
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 27, 2015 % Judgment Delivered on: December 01, CM(M) 1155/2015.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 27, 2015 % Judgment Delivered on: December 01, 2015 + CM(M) 1155/2015 PURAN CHAND Through:... Petitioner Mr.Arun Kumar and Mr.Udit
More informationIN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2018] NZEmpC 10 EMPC 213/2017. TKR PROPERTIES T/A TOP PUB & ROUTE 26 BAR AND GRILL Plaintiff
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND IN THE MATTER OF AND IN THE MATTER AND IN THE MATER BETWEEN AND [2018] NZEmpC 10 EMPC 213/2017 a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority of an
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT OAR ES SALAAM RULING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT OAR ES SALAAM 1. ATTORNEY GENERAL} 2. T.R.A RULING Mlay, J. This ruling is on a preliminary objection on points of law to an application for leave to apply for the orders
More informationSupreme Court of India. Prithvichand Ramchand Sablok vs S.Y.Shinde on 13 May, 1993
Supreme Court of India Equivalent citations: 1993 AIR 1929, 1993 SCR (3) 729 Author: Ahmadi Bench: Ahmadi, A.M. (J) PETITIONER: PRITHVICHAND RAMCHAND SABLOK Vs. RESPONDENT: S.Y.SHINDE DATE OF JUDGMENT13/05/1993
More informationCharles De Barbier and another v Roland Leduc HCVAP 2008/010
Page 1 Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court Reports/ 2008 / St. Kitts and Nevis / Charles De Barbier and another v Roland Leduc - [2008] ECSCJ No. 134 [2008] ECSCJ No. 134 Charles De Barbier and another v Roland
More informationIN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA-1 ST INSTANCE DIVISION
IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA-1 ST INSTANCE DIVISION (Coram: Johnston Busingye, P.J; Mary Stella Arach-Amoko, DPJ; John Mkwawa, J) APPLICATION NO. 6 OF 2011 [Arising from Reference No.
More informationSMALL CLAIMS COURT ACT
LAWS OF KENYA SMALL CLAIMS COURT ACT NO. 2 OF 2016 Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org Small Claims Court No. 2 of 2016 Section
More informationCitation Parties Legal Principles Discussed. Valambhia, Civil Application No.18 of 1993 (Unreported). J.A, NSEKELA, - that it has inherent J.
1 Citation Parties Legal Principles Discussed CRIMINAL ROBERT EDWARD The Court may only review APPLICATION MORINGE@KADOGOO its decisions as spelt out in NO.9 OF 2005 VS THE REPUBLIC- Chandrakand Joshubhai
More informationDate of last Order. Date of Ruling
Date of last Order Date of Ruling TIMA HAJI through the services of K. MWITTAWAISSAKA ADVOCATE,has made an application by Chamber Summons under the Civil Procedure Code 1966 seeking from this court, the
More information2 October, & 16 November, 2006.
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM ( RAMADHANL J. A,: MUNUO. J. A.: And KILEO, J. A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 55 OF 2000 SALIMA HUSSEIN... APPELLANT VERSUS HUSSEIN IBRAHIM SADIKI & SONS... RESPONDENT
More informationHIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE DUBE J HARARE, 28 August, 2 & 8, 23 September Urgent Application
1 RAMWIDE INVESTMENTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED versus RONDEBUILD ZIMBABWE (PRIVATE) LIMITED and MESSENGER OF COURT MATEBELELAND NORTH PROVINCE and WILLIAM MAKUSHU HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE DUBE J HARARE, 28 August,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM RUPIANA TUNGU 3 OTHERS APPELLANTS VERSUS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM RUPIANA TUNGU 3 OTHERS APPELLANTS VERSUS Date of Last Order:08/05/2008 Date of Judgment: 27/05/2008 According to the memorandum of appeal filed in this court
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007
1 CLAIM NO. 292 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007 (BELIZE TELECOM LIMITED (JEFFREY PROSSER (BOBBY LUBANA (PUBLIC SERVICE UNION (BELIZE NATIONAL TEACHERS UNION ( (AND ( (THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
More informationBERMUDA RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BERMUDA BX 1 / 1965
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BERMUDA BX 1 / 1965 [made under section 9 of the Court of Appeal Act 1964 and brought into operation on 2 August 1965] TABLE OF CONTENTS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment reserved on : 25th May, 2006 Date of decision : July 27th, 2006 RFA No. 139/2005 Sh. Ajay Kumar Grover... Appellant through
More informationIn this application, the applicant has moved the Court to review its. decision in Criminal Appeals Nos. 128 and 129 of 2007.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA ATTABORA (CORAM: LUANDA, l.a. MMILLA, l.a., And MWARIJA, l.a.) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2010 DAUDI SIO MAGUNGA APPLICANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC RESPONDENT (An application
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, HELD AT JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, HELD AT JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Reportable Case no: JS 1505/16 In the matter between: MOQHAKA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY Applicant and FUSI JOHN MOTLOUNG SHERIFF OF THE HIGH COURT,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM VERSUS SALMA AHMAD RESPONDENT.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM ASHURA M. MASOUD APPELLANT VERSUS SALMA AHMAD RESPONDENT. Date of last Order: 14/12/2006 Date of Judgment: 14/09/2007 This is an appeal from the decision
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL Of TANZANIA AT ZANZIBAR
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Of TANZANIA AT ZANZIBAR 1. SALUM ABASS SALUM } 2. ABDALLA HDA SHAMTE... RESPONDENTS 3. ALl SElF AU :. (Appeal from the Judgment and Decree of the High Court of Zanzibar at Vuga)
More informationTHE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA. GOVERNMENT NOTICE NO 205 published on 22/7/2005. THE PUBLIC PROCUREMENT ACT, 2004 (ACT No.
THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA GOVERNMENT NOTICE NO 205 published on 22/7/2005. THE PUBLIC PROCUREMENT ACT, 2004 (ACT No. 21 OF 2004) RULES THE PUBLIC PROCUREMENT APPEALS RULES, 2005 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM VERSUS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM ERNEST MANENO SHIJA VERSUS MAZINGA CORPORATION PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT Date of last Order: 19/09/2006 Date of Ruling: 06/11/2007 Mlay, J. Mzinga Corporation is
More informationNo. 13 Written Laws (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No.3) 2016 THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA ACT SUPPLEMENT. No th November, 2016
ISSN 0856 033IX THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA ACT SUPPLEMENT No. 16 18 th November, 2016 to the Gazette of the United Republic of Tanzania No. 48 Vol 97 dated 18 nd November, 2016 Printed by the Government
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment delivered on: CS(OS) 2318/2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment delivered on: 14.08.2012 CS(OS) 2318/2006 MR. CHETAN DAYAL Through: Ms Yashmeet Kaur, Adv.... Plaintiff versus MRS. ARUNA MALHOTRA
More informationTHE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) IN THE MATTER OF THE BANKRUPTCY ACT CAP 67 AND
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) IN THE MATTER OF THE BANKRUPTCY ACT CAP 67 AND THE MATTER OF A PETITION FOR A RECEIVING ORDER BY MARIA K MUTESI (DEBTOR)
More informationJUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appellants were charged in the High Court of Tanzania, at
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA ATTABORA (CORAM: MASSATI, J.A., MUSSA, J.A. And MWARIJA, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 371 OF 2015 1. HAMISI CHUMA @ HANDO MHOJA} 2. MANYERI KUYA APPELLANTS VERSUS THE REPUBLIC................................
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT BUKOBA CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.6 OF 2014 PHILMON ZUBERI APPLICANT VERSUS
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT BUKOBA CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.6 OF 2014 PHILMON ZUBERI APPLICANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC RESPONDENT (Application for extension of time within which to file Application
More informationIN THE GAUTENG DIVISION HIGH COURT, PRETORIA (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA)
1 IN THE GAUTENG DIVISION HIGH COURT, PRETORIA (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) Case Number: 31971/2011 Coram: Molefe J Heard: 21 July 2014 Delivered: 11 September 2014 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 297 OF 2004 IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 297 OF 2004 IN EXECUTION PETITION NO. 99 OF 1997 Judgment reserved on: July 31, 2007 Judgment delivered
More informationAshan Devi & Anr vs Phulwasi Devi & Ors on 19 November, 2003
Supreme Court of India Ashan Devi & Anr vs Phulwasi Devi & Ors on 19 November, 2003 Author: Dharmadhikari Bench: Shivaraj V. Patil, D.M. Dharmadhikari. CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 3130 of 2002 Special Leave
More informationStandards (Certification) THE STANDARDS ACT (No.2 OF 2009) REGULATIONS Made under section 36
GOVERNMENT NOTICE No. 406 published on 25/12/2009 THE STANDARDS ACT (No.2 OF 2009) ------------------- REGULATIONS ------------------- Made under section 36 ------------------- THE STANDARDS (CERTIFICATION)
More informationTHE INDUSTRIAL COURT (PROCEDURE) RULES, Citation. These Rules may be cited as the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules, 2010.
The Industrial Court (procedure) Rules, 2010 Published On: Fri 28, May, 2010 IN EXERCISE of the powers conferred by section 21 (4) of the Labour Institutions Act, 2007, the Rules Board, in consultation
More informationCORAM: PWAMANG, J.S.C. SITTING AS A SINGLE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE ACCRA, GHANA.AD. 2016 CORAM: PWAMANG, J.S.C. SITTING AS A SINGLE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT CIVIL MOTION NO. J8/90/2016 17 TH NOVEMBER
More informationOrder COLLEGE OF PHARMACISTS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Order 02-03 COLLEGE OF PHARMACISTS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner January 24, 2002 Quicklaw Cite: [2002] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 3 Document URL: http://www.oipcbc.org/orders/order02-03.pdf
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of Decision: 11 th March, 2010
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.1702/2010 Date of Decision: 11 th March, 2010 PAVITRA GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.... Petitioner Through: Mr. L.B. Rai & Mr. Rajeev Kumar Rai, Advocates
More information