This appeal originates from the decision of the High Court
over a disputed piece of land. The applicant initially, sued the Respondent
before the High Court at Mwanza. The matter was struck out with costs on the
ground that the plaint ought to be rejected under the provisions of Order VII,
rule 11 (a) of the Civil Procedure Code [Cap 33 R.E. 2002]. Desirous of
challenging the decision to this Court, the applicant lodged a notice of
intention to appeal to this Court and applied in writing for a copy of the
proceedings, ruling and drawn order of the High Court. Subsequent he filed an
application to this Court for stay of execution. It was held that the notice of
appeal was invalid for its reference to wrong originating proceedings. The
applicant continued with his quest for justice. His next step was knocking at
the doors of this Court once again through Civil Application No. 9 of 2013,
praying for extension of time to lodge notice of appeal. The application was
struck on the ground that the matter was incompetent in terms of rule 47 of the
Rules.
Following Court’s direction, the applicant moved the High
Court vide Miscellaneous Land Application No. 151 of 2013, for the same
reliefs he is now seeking. At that time there was another application by him,
i.e., Miscellaneous Land Application No. 65 of 2012 for extension to time to
apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal still pending. Moreover, while
the other two applications remained pending, the applicant, once again, moved
the High Court vide Miscellaneous Land Application No. 71 of 2015 for
the same reliefs he is now seeking. Having taken cognizance of the multiple
applications that the applicant had lodged and upon the applicant’s concession
that two of his applications were an abuse of the judicial process, the High
Court, struck out Miscellaneous Land Application No. 65 of 2012 and
Miscellaneous Land Application No. 151 of 2013 with costs. What remained for
determination before the High Court was Miscellaneous Land Application No. 71
of 2015. However, the Court dismissed the aforesaid application on the ground
that it was time-barred. Following that dismissal, the applicant lodged the
present application as a second bite. The issue before the Court is whether the
applicant has, in accordance with rule 10 of the Rules, shown good cause for
granting his solicitation for extension of time in respect of filing notice of
appeal, lodging a letter requesting for certified copy of proceedings and
applying for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal.