STANBIC BANK TANZANIA, BUSINESSMAN TAKE LOAN DISPUTE TO COURT

STANBIC Bank Tanzania Limited has filed some grounds of objections, seeking dismissal of a suit lodged by businessman, Martin Mwampinyila Mlelwa, over a dispute involving payment of 238m/- loan facility.

The bank, the defendant in the case, alleges that the High Court's District Registry, where the suit has been filed, lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter and that the plaint is bad in law for non-compliance with the mandatory provisions under the Civil Procedure Code.

Through her Advocate Paschal Kamala from Kesaria and Company Advocates, the bank alleges further that the businessman, the plaintiff in the matter, has no cause of action against her.

Apart from filing the grounds of objections, the Bank has also raised a counter claim for payments of 249m/- following an alleged move by the plaintiff's failure to repay the loan facility in question.

In his suit, the plaintiff is requesting the court to declare that the notice given by the bank for intention to sale two properties and shops that he had mortgaged to procure the loan is illegal and that the court should order the entire sale null and void.

The plaintiff entered into the loan agreement with the defendant where the later advanced the term loan facility to him to the tune of 238,222,000/- being restructuring of existing overdraft into a term loan secured by titles of plots situated in Mbeya City. Also the titles based on two shops, one at Dar es Salaam and the other at Mbeya.

The titles had been used as security for the loan. Apart from such loan, the plaintiff had also obtained 130m/- from the defendant that was allegedly paid.

"Despite the trustfulness of the plaintiff, the defendant being overwhelmed with malicious intention to deprive the plaintiff's rights, served the notice of intention to sale the properties, while (he) has not failed to pay as he has been paying the debt to date," part of plaint states.

However, in its written statement of defence, the defendant bank, denied the claims by the plaintiff, stating that she had availed the plaintiff a term loan of 50m/- in August 2010 and an overdraft of 30m/- in June 2010.

Subsequently, in December, the bank alleges, availed to the businessman the term loan of 150m/- and an overdraft of 100m/-, making a total exposure of 250m/-.

Upon failure by the plaintiff to service the two facilities, the plaintiff requested for restructuring to 230,222,000/- in 2013. "Even after restructuring the said facilities, the plaintiff failed to pay the monthly installments as agreed.

The amount due to the plaintiff as of April 14, 2014 is 249,178,097/81. The defendant had remained with no option other than to give the plaintiff the statutory notice," he stated.