The main issue which this ruling seeks to answer is whether
the Court can invoke its inherent powers under rule 4 (2) (a) and (b) of the
Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 (the Rules) to issue an order restraining
the first, second and third Respondents from executing a decree of an inferior
tribunal.
In justifying the application, counsel for the Applicant argued
that the Court is being moved to invoke its inherent jurisdiction in terms of
rule 4 (2) (a) and (b) of the Rules to grant a temporary injunction to
restrain the ordered eviction of the applicant from the disputed property
pending the hearing of the revision already instituted in the Court. He
clarified that the applicant could not apply for a stay of execution of the decree
under rule 11 of the Rules because the said provisions contemplate issuance of
a stay pending determination of an intended appeal where the applicant has
already lodged a notice of appeal, but in this case no such notice could be
filed.
Dr. Masumbuko Lamwai, learned counsel for the first, second,
third and fourth Respondents, on the other hand, disagreed. He submitted so
ardently that the Court cannot legally injunct the Respondents from executing
the decree under consideration. In elaboration, he argued that as a matter of
practice, an order of injunction is issued, in appropriate circumstances, by a
court of first instance, not a final appellate court.