Case No.:

(AC-Revision-3oo- 1959)

Court:

Court of Appeal

Issue No.:

1960

Principles

·  Civil practice and procedure—Necessity of reasonable expedition in litigation

Litigants must use reasonable expedition in conducting their cases. It is in
the public interest that litigation should not be protracted unduly.

Judgment

(COURT OF APPEAL)

HEIRS OF IBRAHIM ABDEL RAHMAN V. HUSSEIN IBRAHIM

AND ABDEL HAMEED IBRAHIM

(AC-Revision-3oo- 1959)

 Revision

A case begun in 1935, marked by extreme dilatoriness of the parties, was dismissed in 1959.

January 17, 1960. M. I. El Nur, Acting C.j.: —This case by applicant’s heirs was instituted in Debba Civil Court in 1935 and was referred by the District Judge to El Debba Sheikh’s Court in 1937 and it was dismissed for lack of prosecution in 1942, but reopened in 1945. Subsequently there was a hearing by District Judge, Debba, in which Abdel Rahman Ibrahim only appeared. He was then told to appear in Merowe District Court, but he did nothing of the sort. In 1948 Mekki Ibrahim applied for hearing and a date was fixed, but he failed to appear and the case was dismissed.

In 1949 Ahmed Ibrahim Abdel Rahman applied again for reopening of the case. On September 12, 1949, the District Judge dismissed this application. He then applied to the judge of the High Court, Northern Province, for revision of the order of the District Judge on September 12, ‘1949. On January 30, 1950, the judge of the High Court dismissed his application summarily and ordered refund of the fees paid by him on his application for revision. The grounds of dismissal were “the extraordinary history of want of prosecution of this claim and the principle that it is to the public interest there should be an end to litigation.”

On May 30, 1959, i.e., almost ten years after the decision of the judge of the High Court, Northern Province, referred to above, Mekki Ibrahim Abdel Rahman petitioned District Judge, Merowe, to institute an action on the same subject again. On June 1, 1959, District Judge, Merowe, referring to above history of his claim, dismissed his petition. He therefore applied to Province Judge, Northern Province, for revision of the District Judge’s order. The learned Province Judge dismissed his application summarily on October 4, 1959, for the same reason given by his -predecessor on January 30, 1950. Applicant applied to me for revision of the Province Judge’s order of October 4, 1959. I,am in full agreement with the learned province Judge’s reason. This application is to be summarily dismissed. The courts cannot be bothered with this insignificant dispute for more than twenty-five years on end. It is to the public interest, as the learned judge of the High Court said on January 30, 1950, that this litigation should be brought tO an end.

                                                             (Application summarily dismissed)