The applicant was the defendant in the Resident Magistrate’s
Court of Mtwara in Civil Case No. 28 of 2016. It was sued in that Court by the
Respondent. The Respondent claimed from the applicant specific damages of TZS
70,000,000.00 arising from its act of allegedly withholding the Respondent’s
certificate of title (the certificate) without justifiable cause. The
Respondent contended that the applicant continued to withhold the certificate
after the former had fully paid the loan of TZS 30,000,000.00 for which the
certificate was deposited as collateral. Apart from specific damages, the
Respondent claimed for general damages, interest at the rate of 30% per annum
on the principal sum claimed and costs of the suit.
The claim was denied by the applicant. It contended that it
was justified to withhold the certificate because of the Respondent’s failure
to discharge its obligation of paying the discharge fee of TZS 150,000.00, a
condition precedent for release of the certificate as stipulated in the loan
agreement.
At the conclusion of the trial, the trial court found that
the applicant did not have any justifiable cause for withholding the
Respondent’s certificate after the latter had fully paid the loan. It however,
found that the Respondent had failed to prove that it suffered any specific
damages as a result of the applicant’s act. With regard to the claim of general
damages, the trial court was of the view that the withholding of the
certificate denied the Respondent the prospects of using it to obtain loans from
other financial institutions. The trial court thus awarded the Respondent
general damages of TZS 60,000,000.00.
The applicant was aggrieved by the decision of the trial
court and therefore, appealed to the High Court. In its judgment handed down on
24/8/2017, the High Court agreed with the trial court that the applicant
unjustifiably withheld the Respondent’s certificate. The learned Judge thus
agreed with the trial court that even though the Respondent did not prove
specific damages, he was entitled to general damages. On the quantum of general
damages however, the High Court found that the awarded amount was on the high
side because the same was based on incorrect reasoning. In the circumstances,
he reduced the amount of TZS 60,000,000.00 awarded by the trial court to TZS
20,000,000.00.
The applicant was further
aggrieved by the decision of the High Court and thus intended to appeal to this
Court. Since under section 5(1) (c) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act [Cap 141
R.E. 2002], the applicant could only appeal with the leave of the High Court or
this Court, he applied for leave to appeal before the High Court vide Misc.
Civil Application No. 10 of 2017. That court dismissed the application hence
the present application which has been preferred as a second bite under section
5(1) (c) of the AJA read together with rule 47 of the Tanzania Court of Appeal
Rules, 2009 as amended. In dismissing the application, the learned High Court
Judge was of the view that the impugned decision does not raise any legal points
which are worth consideration by this Court.