Serikali ya Mapinduzi Zanzibar yatakiwa kulipa deni la shilingi 158bn la mchele wa tani 39,900 za mchele ulioagizwa mwaka 1985.
Shauri hilo lilofikishwa mbele ya Mahakama ya Rufani na kampuni ya Laemthong Rice Co. Ltd, inadai kuwa imekuwa vigumu kupatikana kwa malipo ingawa bidhaa hiyo ili wasili na kupakuliwa toka meli kwa mikupuo mitatu baina ya miaka ya 1986 na 1988.
Shauri hilo lilisikilizwa katika Mahakama Kuu ya Zanzibar mwaka 1996 kuwa mdai alipwe
USD 5,700,000 wakati deni halisi ni USD 69,044,651.24.
Mahakama kuu ya Tanzania imejiridhisha kupitia ushahidi kuwa mchele huu uliwasili na kupakuliwa bandarini kwa mikupuo mitatu na kuwa deni halisi ni USD 69,044,651.24 pamoja na riba ya asilimia 25 kuanzia mwaka 1997 toka deni lilipowasilishwa wizara husika Zanzibar.
Pia Mahakama Kuu imejiridhisha kuwa msajili wa Mahakama Kuu Zanzibar alikosea kusajili deni kuwa ni USD 5,700,000 kutokana na taarifa zisizo sahihi zilizowasilishwa na wizara ya Fedha Zanzibar kuhusu tani hizo 39,900 za mchele.
Imechukua miaka 37 yaani toka mwaka 1985 tangu mkataba baina ya muuzaji wa mchele kampuni ya Laemthong Rice Co. Ltd na Serikali ya Mapinduzi Zanzibar kutia saini hadi suala hilo kufikia tamati katika Mahakama ya juu nchini yaani Mahakama ya Rufaa Tanzania.
11 Novemba 2022
THE Government of Zanzibar is to pay over 158bn/-, which includes principal sum and interests to a Company, Laemthong Rice Co. Ltd, being worth of 39,900 tonnes of rice supplied about 37 years ago.
This follows a decision of the Court of Appeal to allow an appeal under which the Company, the appellant, had lodged to oppose the decision of Registrar of the High Court of Zanzibar to certify the entitled payments at USD 5,700,000 instead of USD 69,044,651.24.
“We allow this appeal. Consequently, we quash the Registrar's ruling as well as (that) of the High Court, (which rejected the application for reference on such decretal sum),” Justices Stella Mugasha, Ignas Kitusi and Sam Rumanyika declared in their judgment delivered recently.
They set aside the certification of USD 5,700,000 and stood by the Court judgment dated 18 December, 2000, stating that the ruling by the Registrar given in favour of Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Finance Zanzibar, the respondent, was wrong whatever arguments that had been put forward.
The justices pointed out that the Court's finding on such point in its earlier decision was very clear that the rice was duly delivered in three shipments between 1986 and 1988 and there was part payment of the agreed price.
They recalled to have states that the balance and the accumulated interest amounted to USD 69, 044, 651.24 as of January 1997 and the efforts to secure settlement of the debt proved fruitless although the respondent did not deny the debt, but actually acknowledged it on 15 July, 1996.
“The above has remained to be the position. The Registrar had no powers to alter the ex- parte judgment and decree of the High Court, nor the previous order of this Court in this case,” the justices said.
Similarly, they said, in dismissing the application for reference lodged by the appellant to challenge the decision of the Registrar, the High Court abdicated its duty to correct the Registrar's manifest error.
“What was stated by the Court in (the case of) Victoria Real Estate Development Limited, on the duty of the parties and even the courts to respect court orders, was recently restated in (the case of) Karori Chogoro vs Waitihache Merengo, Civil Appeal No. 164 of 2018 (unreported),” they said.
On 23 July 1985, which is 37 years ago, at the request of the Government of Zanzibar, the appellant supplied it with 39,900 tonnes of rice worth USD 12,935,685, with compounded interest of 25 percent per annum.
No full payment for the rice has ever been made by the respondent in fulfilment of its contractual obligation.
The appellant instituted proceedings in the High Court claiming the said USD 69, 044, 651.24 together with interest thereon at 25 percent per annum from January 1997 until full payment.
The respondent, though duly represented by the Attorney General's Chambers in Zanzibar, failed to file any defence due to his lack of co-operation with the Chambers. This led to the Chambers withdrawing in frustration. The court entered an ex-parte judgment after receiving evidence of the appellant.
Reason behind the matter pending in Court for all such long is for determination of the amount that should be paid by the respondent and how execution should be carried out.
However, on 18 December, 2000, the Court pronounced itself on that issue. Even after the Court's clear position, execution of the decree proved to be a nightmare and the issue of the amount to be paid was resurrected.
After the enactment of the Government Proceedings Act No. 3 of 2010 that barred such execution, the matter was taken to the Registrar of the High Court of Zanzibar to issue a certificate for the decretal amount.
The Registrar issued a certificate for the amount of USD 5,700,000. The appellant challenged the Registrar's ruling on such certification by way of reference to the High Court. However, the High Court dismissed the reference. It was at that point in time when the matter went back to the Court of Appeal.
Shauri hilo lilofikishwa mbele ya Mahakama ya Rufani na kampuni ya Laemthong Rice Co. Ltd, inadai kuwa imekuwa vigumu kupatikana kwa malipo ingawa bidhaa hiyo ili wasili na kupakuliwa toka meli kwa mikupuo mitatu baina ya miaka ya 1986 na 1988.
Shauri hilo lilisikilizwa katika Mahakama Kuu ya Zanzibar mwaka 1996 kuwa mdai alipwe
USD 5,700,000 wakati deni halisi ni USD 69,044,651.24.
Mahakama kuu ya Tanzania imejiridhisha kupitia ushahidi kuwa mchele huu uliwasili na kupakuliwa bandarini kwa mikupuo mitatu na kuwa deni halisi ni USD 69,044,651.24 pamoja na riba ya asilimia 25 kuanzia mwaka 1997 toka deni lilipowasilishwa wizara husika Zanzibar.
Pia Mahakama Kuu imejiridhisha kuwa msajili wa Mahakama Kuu Zanzibar alikosea kusajili deni kuwa ni USD 5,700,000 kutokana na taarifa zisizo sahihi zilizowasilishwa na wizara ya Fedha Zanzibar kuhusu tani hizo 39,900 za mchele.
Imechukua miaka 37 yaani toka mwaka 1985 tangu mkataba baina ya muuzaji wa mchele kampuni ya Laemthong Rice Co. Ltd na Serikali ya Mapinduzi Zanzibar kutia saini hadi suala hilo kufikia tamati katika Mahakama ya juu nchini yaani Mahakama ya Rufaa Tanzania.
11 Novemba 2022
COURT RESOLVES CONTROVERSY OVER 158BN/- PAYMENTS
By FAUSTINE KAPAMA-JudiciaryTHE Government of Zanzibar is to pay over 158bn/-, which includes principal sum and interests to a Company, Laemthong Rice Co. Ltd, being worth of 39,900 tonnes of rice supplied about 37 years ago.
This follows a decision of the Court of Appeal to allow an appeal under which the Company, the appellant, had lodged to oppose the decision of Registrar of the High Court of Zanzibar to certify the entitled payments at USD 5,700,000 instead of USD 69,044,651.24.
“We allow this appeal. Consequently, we quash the Registrar's ruling as well as (that) of the High Court, (which rejected the application for reference on such decretal sum),” Justices Stella Mugasha, Ignas Kitusi and Sam Rumanyika declared in their judgment delivered recently.
They set aside the certification of USD 5,700,000 and stood by the Court judgment dated 18 December, 2000, stating that the ruling by the Registrar given in favour of Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Finance Zanzibar, the respondent, was wrong whatever arguments that had been put forward.
The justices pointed out that the Court's finding on such point in its earlier decision was very clear that the rice was duly delivered in three shipments between 1986 and 1988 and there was part payment of the agreed price.
They recalled to have states that the balance and the accumulated interest amounted to USD 69, 044, 651.24 as of January 1997 and the efforts to secure settlement of the debt proved fruitless although the respondent did not deny the debt, but actually acknowledged it on 15 July, 1996.
“The above has remained to be the position. The Registrar had no powers to alter the ex- parte judgment and decree of the High Court, nor the previous order of this Court in this case,” the justices said.
Similarly, they said, in dismissing the application for reference lodged by the appellant to challenge the decision of the Registrar, the High Court abdicated its duty to correct the Registrar's manifest error.
“What was stated by the Court in (the case of) Victoria Real Estate Development Limited, on the duty of the parties and even the courts to respect court orders, was recently restated in (the case of) Karori Chogoro vs Waitihache Merengo, Civil Appeal No. 164 of 2018 (unreported),” they said.
On 23 July 1985, which is 37 years ago, at the request of the Government of Zanzibar, the appellant supplied it with 39,900 tonnes of rice worth USD 12,935,685, with compounded interest of 25 percent per annum.
No full payment for the rice has ever been made by the respondent in fulfilment of its contractual obligation.
The appellant instituted proceedings in the High Court claiming the said USD 69, 044, 651.24 together with interest thereon at 25 percent per annum from January 1997 until full payment.
The respondent, though duly represented by the Attorney General's Chambers in Zanzibar, failed to file any defence due to his lack of co-operation with the Chambers. This led to the Chambers withdrawing in frustration. The court entered an ex-parte judgment after receiving evidence of the appellant.
Reason behind the matter pending in Court for all such long is for determination of the amount that should be paid by the respondent and how execution should be carried out.
However, on 18 December, 2000, the Court pronounced itself on that issue. Even after the Court's clear position, execution of the decree proved to be a nightmare and the issue of the amount to be paid was resurrected.
After the enactment of the Government Proceedings Act No. 3 of 2010 that barred such execution, the matter was taken to the Registrar of the High Court of Zanzibar to issue a certificate for the decretal amount.
The Registrar issued a certificate for the amount of USD 5,700,000. The appellant challenged the Registrar's ruling on such certification by way of reference to the High Court. However, the High Court dismissed the reference. It was at that point in time when the matter went back to the Court of Appeal.
