A truck, which destroyed a temporary bridge along Banana-Kinyerezi Road, is seen in 2014 file photo
Dar es Salaam. Owner of a truck which destroyed a temporary bridge along
Banana-Kinyerezi Road, Dar es Salaam in 2014 has been ordered to pay the Tanzania Roads Agency (Tanroads) Sh254.5 million to cover costs of repairs.The order comes following a suit filed by the road agency in 2020 in attempts to recover costs in reconstructing the bridge that was badly damaged by a truck belonging to Camel Concrete (T) Limited.
The company had promised to repair the bridge but allegedly failed to fulfil the promise despite frequent reminders.
It was alleged in court that the truck that was loaded with concrete disobeyed warnings and forced to pass on the bridge and caused the bridge to collapse on March 7, 2014.
The accident caused massive damage to the bridge and sparked the full closure of the Banana-Kinyerezi Tabata Road, Dar es Salaam and subjected road users to untold inconviniences.
High Court Judge Edwin Kakolaki said Tanroads has adduced sufficient evidence to satisfy the court that the bridge was destroyed by Camel Concrete’s truck.
Tanroads took the matter to court in 2020 after several efforts to have Camel reconstruct the bridge at their own costs failed.
Soon after the damage, Tanroads took steps to notify the defendant about the damage. The company apologised and agreed to reconstruct it according to specifications issued by the national road agency.
“The defendant failed to heed to her promise even after being issued with the bill of quantities (BoQ),” argued Tanroads at the hearing of the case.
Given the importance of the key road, Tanroads was left with no option but the reconstruct it and demanded the costs incurred from the defendant but in vein.
Summary suit
Tanroads filed a summary suit against Camel Concrete in 2020 in attempt to recover the money it spent in reconstruction of the bridge.
Summary suit is a specific legal procedure that prevents unreasonable delays and obstructions to hearing of a case by a defendant who has no defence.
Upon filing of the suit and having notified Camel of the case, the company sought a permission to appear in court and defend the suit as per requirement of Order XXXV Rule 2 (2) of the Civil Procedure Code.
However, the application was rejected for the reasons that the company had failed to demonstrate that there were genuine triable issues to warrant the court to grant them permission. The court thus allowed hearing of the case to proceed and consider one side proof.
Issues for determination
Three issues were framed for determination by the High Court which included; whether the defendant’s truck destroyed the bridge and if the answer is yes, whether Tanroad was entitled to Sh254 million claim. Tanroads was represented by State Attorney Stanley Mahenge who was assisted by Luka Shishila.
Tanroad’s senior official Elson Mweladsi testified in court and tendered pictures showing the magnitude to the destruction of the bridge and the motor vehicle that was involved in caused the damage.
He told the court that after notifying Camel of the damage, the company apologised and promised to repair the bridge under their supervision.
The official further testified that company, however, failed to heed to the promised and instead demanded to be availed with the bill of costs for repairing the bridge.
The witness tendered in court a series of documents including a letter wrote by Camel to Tanroads on March 17, 2015, apologizing for destruction of the bridge and promising to reconstruct it.
Another letter from the defendant requesting for estimation of repair cost, methodology and material to be used also formed part of the evidence adduced by Tanroads.
Following the delay, Tanroads engaged Afriq Engineering and Construction Co. Ltd to repair the bridge at Sh254 million. The agency later sent a demand letter to Camel notifying them of the action taken to reconstruct the bridge after her failure to do so, and requested for refund of Sh254 million.
“Nevertheless, defendant never paid the said amount despite of receiving the demand letter, the act which prompt the plaintiff to institute the present case.
Judge Kakolaki said the evidence adduced by Mweladsi, pictures of the bridge and the motor vehicle involved as well as defendant’s letter to Tanroads apologising for the destruction of the bridge, it was no doubt that the bridge was destroyed by the defendant’s truck.
“It is the evidence which I have no reason to disbelieve that the bridge was reconstructed by Afriq Engineering and Construction Co. Ltd at the cost of Sh254.5 million since that unchallenged cost is reflected in the bill of costs,” said the judge.
Camel has also been ordered to pay interest of 20 percent per annum from the date of filling the suit to the date of judgment.
No comments :
Post a Comment