Company in court plea over 92bn/- BoT payment

A LOCAL company, Coast Textiles Limited, has asked the High Court to dismiss with costs the application lodged by the Bank of Tanzania (BoT), seeking to challenge execution of a decree for payments of over 92bn/-.

The BoT have filed an application for reference, requests for stay of execution proceedings between Coast Textiles Limited and FBME Bank, whose managements have been taken over by » 202750005 the Central Bank.

In addition, the BoT seeks the court to review legal impropriety and or material irregularities in the execution proceedings and thereafter quash and set aside the orders issued there from.

However, in his submissions the day before yesterday, the company’s advocate, Joseph Rutabingwa, told Judge Wilfred Ndyansobera that the BoT’s application was incompetent because it has not properly moved the court to intervene into the matter.

Expounding further submission in support of some grounds of objection his client has raised to oppose the application in question, the advocate argued that under the guiding law in civil matters, that is Civil Procedure Code (CPC), there was only one formal method for a party to seek reference reliefs.

He argued that an application for reference is made if the proceedings originate from registrar’s decision in taxation proceedings or subordinate court, as per Order XLI of the CPC. He pointed out that even if there was an alternative model, all provisions cited by the bank could not confer the court jurisdiction.

The advocate submitted further that the BoT was seeking a stay of execution of a decree, whereas the conditions under that provision do not in any way apply to the bank.

“Though not supported by any provision of law, it ought to have been before the same court presided over by the executing officer, the deputy registrar and the executing court could not stay its own proceedings,” he submitted.

Regarding the request for review of execution proceedings, the advocate told the court that there was no enabling provision that has been cited to support the application. He proposed that the proper provision was Order XLII of the CPC.