Musoma Town Council v. Kassam Civ. Application 19-M-70; 19/5/71; Kisanga Ag. J.

 

Musoma Town Council v. Kassam Civ. Application 19-M-70; 19/5/71; Kisanga Ag. J.

       The respondent, an occupier of certain premises in Musoma Township had been assessed to taxation. He lodged an objection before the assessment committee which disallowed it. He appealed to the district court which upheld the objection. The applicant made this application for leave to appeal out of time against the decision of the district court. The respondent objected tot eh application on the ground that no appeal would lie to the High Court because: (a) by s. 13 of the Municipal House Tax (Consolidation) Act 67 of 1963 and appeal lay from the assessment committee to the district court but no further appeal was provided; and (b) s. 70 (1) of the Civil Procedure Code provision for an appeal to the High Court “from any decree passed by a court of a resident magistrate or district court exercising original jurisdiction” but the district court here was not exercising original jurisdiction and therefore its decision was final.

                        Held: (1) “It is clear that the Municipal House Tax (Consolidation) Act cited above makes no provision for further appeal to the High Court.” (2) “The provisions of section 70(1) as set out above mean that an appeal would lie to the High Court from a decree passed by the district court, and the immediate question is whether the decision of the district curt in upholding the respondent’s objection was a decree. That decision is headed “Judgment.” Under the interpretation section 3 of the Civil Procedure Code “judgment” means the statement given by the judge or the magistrate of the grounds of a decree or order . …… under the same section “decree” is defined to mean:- “the formal expression of an adjudication which, so far as the court expression it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be either preliminary or final.” In other words, a decree is one which is made in the suit. The word “suit” is not defined under section 3 and I have not succeeded to find its definition anywhere in the Code. However, section 22 of he Code provides that:- “Every suit shall be instituted by the presentation of a plaint or in such other manner as may be prescribed.” The word “prescribed” is defined in section 3 of the Code to mean, “prescribed” by rules, and the word “rules” is defined in the same section to mean “the rules contained in the first and second Schedules or made under sections 29, 45 or 82.” It would apparent from these provisions that a suit is one which is commenced either by presentation of a plaint of which is commenced in any manner prescribed by the rules of the Civil Procedure Code. In the present case, the proceedings cannot be said to have been commenced in the district court by presenting a plaint. The proceedings were in the nature of an appeal from the decision of the assessment committee, and the document by which they were brought before that court is headed “Grounds of appeal.” So that the proceedings were not a suit, since they were not brought by filing a plaint, and consequently he determination of the district court in the matter could not amount to a decree made in the suit.” (3) “The proceedings were in the nature of an appeal from the decision of the Assessment Committee. That Committee was clearly not a court because under section 3 of the Civil Procedure code, court is defined to mean “…….. the High Court of the United Republic, a court of a resident magistrate or a district court presided over by a civil magistrate and references to a district court are references to as district court presided over by a civil magistrate.” Thus the decision of that committee was not a decree because decree, as defined under section 3 cited above, is one which is made by the court but the assessment committee was not a court. Again, the proceedings were commenced before that committee not by presentation of a prescribed by the rules of Civil Procedure Code, but they were brought by filing notice of objection as prescribed by section 13 of the Municipal House Tax (Consolidation) Act. Thus the proceedings were not a suit and consequently, even assuming that he assessment committee was a court within the meaning of section 3 referred to above, the decision of that committee in the matter could not amount to a decree because it was not made in the suit.” (4) “The determinant of the district court amounted to an order under s. 13 (8) of the Municipal House Tax (Consolidation) Act and the judgment of the court was a statement of reasons for the order.” (5) No appeal lay to the High Court. (6) Application dismissed.