Felalon (Father) v. Kalinga (PC) Civ. Rev. 4-D-7a, 14/7/70; Hamlyn, J.

Felalon (Father) v. Kalinga (PC) Civ. Rev. 4-D-7a, 14/7/70; Hamlyn, J.

These proceedings originated in the Primary Court of Kilolo. The contract was the basis of the claim for the sum of Shs. 1,350/- which concerned payment for bricks made by the plaintiff for the use of the mission at Kilolo. The judgment was given in the Primary Court in favour of the plaintiff in the sum of Shs. 200/- only. Thereafter the dissatisfied plaintiff appealed to the District Court of Iringa which allowed the appeal and “somewhat surprisingly gave judgment for the appellant in the full sum claimed,” though there seemed to be the very slightest evidence to support such a finding. Therefrom the matter was considered by the High Court in its Revisional capacity.

            Held: (1) “In so far as the parties of the case are concerned it would appear that the Mission would have been the proper party to have been the defendant and not one of the Fathers of the Mission, who himself could hardly have been personally responsible for the sum claimed.” (2) “…… It is quite clear that the whole of the proceedings in the Primary Court were not maintainable there. I have already noted that the claim was in contract in the sum of Shs. 1,350/-. Section 14 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act (Cap. 537) as amended by the first schedule of the Written Laws, (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act, 1968, provides jurisdiction of Primary Courts in matters of contract up to a maximum of Shs. 1,000/- and it is consequently apparent that the Primary Court lacked jurisdiction to try this action, which should have been filed in a Court of superior jurisdiction. The proceedings in this case are consequently in excess of jurisdiction and are ultra vires the powers of the trial Court. The proceedings in the Primary Court of Kilolo are void and must be and are hereby ordered to be quashed.” (3) “As a consequence of such order, the appeal to the District Court also had no validity, there being no original proceedings which can support an appeal to a higher Court.” (4) “As a result of this Order the matter is remitted to the Primary Court where it shall be explained to the original parties- should the plaintiff desire to institute fresh proceeding , they should be filed in a Court of competent jurisdiction, where the matter can be tried de novo.”