William David Carlisle Wise v E. F. Harvey Limited (Application No.8/146/1987) [1987] ZMSC 102 (24 November 1987)

' ' I I ou IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA Application No.8/146/1987 HOLDEN' AT' LUSAKA ' ' (Civil Jurisdiction) •\ Mr. Mr. Hamir, Messrs· SollytPatel' Hami r' &•ct:awrerice~ forrther'respondentY c. Banda, of Chifumo Banda & Associates, for the-appellant i ;,;r;1, :H\,J- ',r>~E>·J tur tit:: .ti::::iJ:1r;,,1:.iy):·,:~~ DofcI:}.lt it· .· ,:·. •\ . ·,;:;,i n1i;. •:r ',_,;,,i:_ ~-_ft.:1··rt;Dl.1L rry;t·~tiemt~ }l:(½,'\';;}J:y Ic_dg'ln~- t~1t:1, :, ~- "1·-"r.·•··.··,;',i •·,:,·1 ··· · .. -.,.· !~·~,.:"'.' ~-~f'I . ,, . ..._n,--,, ~. Jl . ') .,.,l·th~\~ ••'1-l·u'.1 : I have .considered this.,Jl!atter-,. and all the submissions which have '., ..... ,, ... ··- ,, .. '"'-'•' .,.. ,, ,· . ' .. been made. In particular, I have. noted the history of this ,litigation and the various applications previously made both'below and here. ' . .. / . . . In· '. . view of the fact that the record of appeal is (1ni!llY ready for lodging ' despite the delays herein, I would rive{pne {°o)e-S.h~nce, a final chan~e . ~.,,,. ~ .. ----1 , • .. . ,f''.'J'c· ""' -.> .. ,. -· ' · . ' to the appellant to prosecute th~1 apµ,e~V•i:. O~g'\:~Ei!;;;~onditions to be adumbrated in a moment, I dismiss'th·e "applicat'ion"!•fo dismiss the appeal i for want of prosecution but would instead grant the appellant a final \ extension of twenty-one-days within which to lodge not only· '.'.the record ' . ... . ' but his heads of argument as well so that the case can be allocated a hearing date early in the new year. Unless. the record and the heads of . ' . . \ ' ' argument are filed within the extended time, the appeal shall stand dismissed-without further application on the part of the· respondent. ' • '\._:, l With regard to the enforcement of the lower court's judgment,! find th, ·there is no basis to stay execution of the award for possession of the farm. Previous stays were for the purpose of harvesting and removing· . , themselves and it would be totally inequitable to allow the appellant 2/ ....... . · ... • l! . • . . :'};,: : : . L ~-. '.~ <~: \·:'.f ~~~ ... ~.:\(:L~~iL 1 s-1{ to plant.new crops and so again stretch their claim for further relief against the lower court's judgment in that respect. The appellant has been in default and quite apart from being • · , - _::·'.· ~.:."._;:_LJ.' 1.·· r2: .. i~ Ro:;~~ri(-,f~,:.f:: .. :·rt condemned in the costs of these applications and the hearing· hereof, ii -'i• ! is only fair that the. respon9en:t/s position be saf.e~µ~r:deq in. the mann( suggested by Mr. Hamir,and agreed .. to by Mr. Banda • ., ;. The. sums,owing .. by i •'-: •• ,1 • ....::1 rJ~'. •. • . • · .. · , : 1,.;,: ,·i.,., :-, . . . · ,,. ·· ·.-·•·r, ' .. ·. appellant under the judgment below must be :Plac~d_,,,)'lithin,the course oi · • ,- , ,,,( di,,/,,.,,.,·. -I : 1 •. ,, .. , . Q . .. J . the next twenty-one days, in,an acc_ount . .to,_.be operated join.tly,~y ,, ' I , •• , ' •" • • " I ' / l> , '- '• • '-•"•" •' • • counsel for the appellant and counsel for the respondent ... Default in . . , . ., -··-·.-~,--::~·,,~ -.~',·. -!-.:-1,·1:··~· · ' .. .-,.ci complying with any of the aforesaid coriditions;-riainely lodging"the ____ _ : 1 L i. record· and heads of argµnie1r!,__arid_ ~~p9_s_i:tir1g :the mqnEly_al_l .. liJ~~HL:t~-e.~. ;·; :·-i ; .. next twenty-one days will mean, and it is so ordered, that the appeal shall stand dismissed without'.more. dn:i cd l ::>r: :;o,t:,1'i ,;,:1,;,11:. 1,,,,1,,;-, lr:)lisl: to bo .. tho· .re·co\~0 •;~1itf'il·:~ t;<·1ic11 t{:· lodg~·.not ·.~n1lt ··, .. 1,-i::·Y,,(J!>;! ''.·:1i'.:-:-,u i'-:(' .. :·1· ')tdic~tir~",f;, '4)f;· titB·f)t;1Y-:t !J:f ti~~!-/t'-.:tj}Ondtt.c1t ... ., vt·i.~;t t~·._;";•1·,:: '.i :11-:: r-·r1f:.<: 0c•:•:1:·~~nt of th'C l<JWeT"' court.'i. judgrr:.tnt,l {ind Uli. •J . I ,, ' ~1 .. , ~ :- .. ~" .. I/ ""--·