Automated Summary
Key Facts
The respondent (Said Abdallah Msangi) was ordered to pay TZS 5,300,000 to the decree holder (AFRISCAN GROUP (T) LTD) following a 2015 taxation of costs. Despite a 2021 court invitation to show cause against execution, the respondent failed to prove a pending appeal to halt enforcement. The court ruled to detain the respondent as a civil prisoner for six months if payment isn't made within three months. The decree holder must then deposit TZS 300,000 monthly for the respondent's upkeep.
Issues
The court addressed the issue of whether the pendency of an appeal before the Court of Appeal serves as a valid basis to stay the execution of a judgment by arrest and detention. It ruled that the pendency of an appeal is not a bar to execution, and the respondent must seek a stay order from the relevant authorities. The court found no evidence of a pending appeal in the respondent's affidavit and granted the execution application as prayed.
Holdings
- The court grants the application for execution by arrest and detention, ordering the judgment debtor to pay TZS 5,300,000 within three months. Failure to pay will result in six months of detention, with the decree holder required to deposit the monthly allowance for the prisoner's upkeep in prison.
- The court determines that the pendency of an appeal does not bar execution unless a stay of execution has been ordered by the relevant authorities.
Remedies
- The court granted the applicant's application for execution by arresting and detaining the judgment debtor as a civil prisoner for six months, with three months given to pay the sum of TZS 5,300,000/=.
- If the judgment debtor fails to pay the sum within three months, the decree holder must deposit the monthly allowance of TZS 300,000/= for the civil prisoner's upkeep in prison.
Monetary Damages
5300000.00
Legal Principles
The court applied the principle that the pendency of an appeal is not a bar to the execution of a judgment. Even if an appeal is pending, the respondent must seek a stay of execution from the relevant authorities. The ruling references Order XXXIX Rule 5 (2) of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap 33 R.E 2019, which supports that a pending appeal does not halt execution proceedings.
Cited Statute
Civil Procedure Code
Judge Name
C.P MKEHA
Passage Text
- the decision awarding costs to the applicant was delivered more than five years ago, in no way can an application for stay of execution of the said decision be determinable at this court.
- It is trite law that pendency of appeal is not a bar to the execution.
- the respondent/judgement debtor has failed to show cause why the application for execution should not be granted... the application for execution is consequently granted as prayed.