THE Kinondoni District Court in Dar es Salaam yesterday failed to settle through mediation the case in which M-Pesa subscriber Francis Mosha demands Vodacom Tanzania to pay him 26m/- as damages for allegedly debiting his mobile money account.

The accuser claimed that the mobile company debited his account in two different occasions.

The matter was presented for the first pre-trial conference before Principal Resident Magistrate Aron Lyamuya but the parties failed to end the suit through the mediation.

Advocate Michael Malele, the Counsel for M-Pesa Subscriber, informed the court that the parties could not settle their case under the mediation.

"Under the circumstances, your honour, we ask for another date for the final pre-trial conference," the advocate Malele submitted.

Defence Counsel for Vodacom Company identified in one name as Mudi could not raise any objection, prompting the magistrate to adjourn the matter to September 16, 2021.

During the final pre-trial conference, the court is scheduled to frame the issues for determination of the suit before allowing the parties to start calling witnesses and subsequently come up with an arrangement through which the matter should be heard and determined.

In the suit of its own kind, Mr Mosha, the plaintiff, claims for payments of 6,496,320/- being specific damages he suffered as result of alleged negligence by Vodacom Company, the defendant. He is also pushing for payment of 20m/- as general damages.

The plaintiff alleged that on January 8, 2020, his account, was for unknown, reasons debited the sum of 20,000/- to be an overdraft repayment to M-Pesa.

According to the plaintiff, a similar situation happened on the following day when 9,136/- was debited from his account.

He claims to have immediately made efforts by contacting the defendant's customer service hotline number for clarification and was informed that the problem would be resolved. To his surprise, the plaintiff alleges that more than three months elapsed without rectifying the situation.

Due to the defendant's negligence or failure to act promptly on his concern within the prescribed statutory period of 30 days, the plaintiff was compelled to engage an advocate who issued a demand notice. Notwithstanding such notice, the defendant's reply allegedly was evasive and not satisfactory.

The plaintiff had no other option than filing the suit in question. In his written statement of defence, however, the defendant vehemently denied the claims, noting some of the facts stated in the plaint of the suit, but disputing others and has put the plaintiff to strictly prove the same.

Copyright Tanzania Daily News. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com)., source News Service English