The applicant has filed a Notice of Appeal intending to
appeal against the decision of the High Court in Consolidated Civil Appeals No.
98 and 143 of 2017. Pending that intended appeal, the said applicant applies
for an order of stay of execution of the decree in that case. It is supported
by an affidavit of the applicant himself, while the Respondent took an
affidavit in reply contesting the application. Perhaps it is useful to state at
this early hour that the proceedings from which this application arises are
matrimonial, and mainly at issue is division of matrimonial assets after
dissolution of the parties’ marriage.
When the application came before us for hearing, the applicant
appeared through Mr. Japhet Eliamini Mmuru, learned advocate, whereas the
Respondent appeared in person without legal representation. The learned counsel
prayed to address us orally in terms of rule 106(10) (b) of the Rules as
amended by the Tanzania Court of Appeal (Amendment) Rules, 2019, GN No. 344 of
2019. As there was no objection from the Respondent, and since rule 106 (10)
(b) of the Rules as amended permits such a course when no written submissions
have been filed, we granted the prayer.
Submitting on the application advocate for the applicant then
invited the Court to grant it on the ground that rule 11(7) of the Rules has
been complied with, and he concluded by submitting that the intended execution
will cause the applicant irreparable loss.
On the other hand, the Respondent fiercely resisted and prayed
that the application should not be granted. The Respondent submitted that the
applicant has all along been in possession and control of the matrimonial
assets subject of the decree and he has been realizing financial benefit
therefrom, therefore contending that she is the one who suffers from the
delayed execution.