19900814 TZHC Dar es Salaam

IlJ T:IE ilIGII Cuu1lT O::T' Tij_1;2;1:J:II1l . :~T D,:2 ES 81.I,.i~lJ!I ·' (Fron lktional IIousine,- ll.ppoc.l No. 33 of 1908 Orieinnl Applic2,tion 51/DO of Morocoro Rccioncl IIouslnJ Tri1n.utnl) .'JllYJLi."11:..TIFU SiulIT•~• • •• • • ·• ••••• ~ ••• ·•.;, ...... •. • •. •. • • •• • • , .J..PPELL.llNT vorsus S:.JJ)J~ r.IOIIl1.MEID I • • • ~ • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • nESPONDENT JUDGHEN'T MlJ'IGAiW, J • On 16/11/07 S0<-v'f.". Hoh8Dacl 1-rho is the respondent in this appcm1 broUGht ~ o.pplicatior.1 ccr-,inst -'i;ho a.ppollnnt Abdurr.•.:tif $0,l,UI:1 bofo:ro tho R~~ionol IIousinG Tribuncl of Morogoro (haroinaftGr roforrod to as "tl.:e t-ric..l tribunal"). In p~xo{,-ro.ph 4 of tho. o.pplion.tion $£1.c"l.dt; .stntod -'Ghnt by nn t.'.[.TGO::ltmt in w1"'i tine dated 4/9 /05 f.bdurc.tif hro C'. tanr'MY of o. house from her for o. ~er□ of one yocx- o.t tho rent of shs.341 000/- per yoo:r, affcotivo fron 2/n/05, Md she attnchod ~ oopy of ·~ho scid loaso to tho o.pplio::-.,tion which wo.s on:rkod 11Anno.xturo 1'..11 , It is clGnr fron that atm©..-tv.:ro thc1.t the rant was pcid ill o.dvnnoo, . In nt pax£'.(.T[',ph 5 of tho a.pplicntion sho cln.inod thn.t/thc Gnd of tho t6ncnoy tGri:1 Abdurn.tif held ovor imd looked tho proniscs, thoroby provontin(; hor fron ro-pO!'lf'108d11g tho sr-no, In pa.rU<.,"Ta.ph 6 she olniood thc'..t c..s o. result

of tho nctj0;1 ,....p fl1,r1,,,....,_~oif sho suffered ond continued to Slll.~or i·lhoroforo she cln.iraed for ·tho followinG raliofe: (a.) on ordGr· ooopollin[; Abdura.tif to rctuni ·::he keys of tho pronisas and allowinc her to doms0 -~,~'"' ;--::;,:-::~··.:·· .,. . : . ..,;•--+,hor ·j_:>orson; (b) dom~os in tho sun of shs. 34,000/-; (o) costs of' ·i;ho a,pplico.tion; md (d) such othGr relief c,s ~ho t:riru. tr~.buncl clr:m.1cd justo In his rmswc;:r- J\J-,c=;,,,,,,.,_-!;i:f c~cniocl oner) 6nd every dlG 0 l\tion nr..clo by S11<."1.d::i.. in tho n.pplicntion ccci:tst hin, l1J.1on the n.pplicr,tion wns ccllod on for hoa.r-il'lg' on 13/5/0G Mt'crl.--i..ssri.ti counsel for lil>dur:.1:tif .i.·c.J..:::...:.L: " prol:i.ra:ino:ry point Md nado two su'Jnissions in rocc;rcl to tho allogod tcn::-11.cy t'.t,'To·oncntG. The first subnissiort wr.,s tlmt tho scid £1o"'TGC □ont offended tho ,provisions of section 21 of tho Ilcnt Restriction Act, 1904, e.11d. thD.t it wns, under sootion 46( 1) of tha.t ii.ct, not lcgnl'J.J" onforocc'.blo~ Tho second si,J)r:1ission was thc..t t:10 c:..;i.-concnt was unstnnpad and thus :i.ltn<lniasiblo in oviclcnco, encl. a. rcforcnoe wo,s r:iaclo to tho provision of scd;ion 46 of tho Stc1Jp Duty Act, 1972. The tri.:1.l tril)ttnc.l sustc:.inod tho objection and disniosccl tho ;:,..pplioation, Wo do not know, beomso the record is silent, whcthor tho other

nonbcr.s of tho trial tribuna.l oxpressod thoix opinions on tho nn.ttor, end it has boon suboi ttod on bchn.lf of So.ode. in this Cour·Ji; that tho procoodinc viola.tod tho provision of section 11(4) of the Rent Restriction .L'..ct, encl I think thoro is substnnoo in tha.t subr.d.ssion,. Dy th.:i.t provision tho locrnocl oh_oirnon was obliGcd to seek o.nd record tho opinions of other □o□bors present. Upon the cli.orJioorJ. of tho applicntion ltt • Massa.ti stooc1 up and told tho trial tribunal the;~ 1tls cliGnt had alreQ<ly vnon.tod tho pI'er.rl.sos and tho.t Saad.a. wa.s r0fusing to rcQeivc tho keys. Tho trial tribunal thon clirootod tha~ tho _ appellant sb.ould del;l.vor ·tho koys to l:.or before it on 16/6/0D, Abdura.td.£ duly obcyod tho order r.ml broueht tho keys to tho trial. tribm1<.,l on tho appointed dt\Y• Dut Snr:i.d.a. rofusod to recoivo tho koys 9 seyiJ.1G that sho intonclocl to lodgo an n.ppoiil.1, D{:;'ninst tho c1im:rl:sacl_ of her r.pplioation. It w;:,s then orderccl by tho• trial tribunal that the keys 1Jo kept by it penclii.1...:; tho intended 0.,ppo~J.• Indeed, Sn.ad.a r..ppoc.J.ocl the disr.1iss~ to tho IIousin[; Appc<'..ls Tribunal (horcinn.ftor referred to <'..S 11 tho Appeo.ls tribuno.l" ). Tho ::,,ppcr'.l suoooodod+ Tho Appoc.ls tribunc,l considered tho provision of section 11(4) of tho Rant Restriction ii.ct• Like -'i;l1is Court, it tool:: tho view

t!2::,,-'1i tho opinions of tho othor uonbors of tho -'.;rii'..l tr:l.bun~.1· shoulcl ho.,vo boon soue,1.1t Mel rocordod in regm-d to the prolir:d.n..;;r-y objection tcltcr1. by Mr 0 M:iss2.ti, Next the il.pper-J.s -'.;ribm1al. considered the provisions of section 21 of tho Rent Restriction Act md held that those provi~ions _do not c.,pply to tenancy ~"T'eooonts for terns oort:un whore ~cnt pt:dd i~ ndvancc is only for tho spooifiod potiod, like the one ploc'..Clod. ::;· C.-.:-.;:::-. i.: ·. hor npplicc.tion, With rec.'.'.I'd to thG provisions of soction 46 of the Sk..r:ip Duty Act, tho Apponls tribunal hclc1 th..,t they woro n.J.so innpplicnblo,:.bco2.Uso, in itti viow, Annc:rlurc ;~r· "wM not for the purpose of pcy□ont of rant, lmt was r:ior(!ly ovidonce to suppo~ tononcy relationship botwcon tho pc.rtios, n record to servo tho nonory•" Tho li.ppools tribuncl ooncluc1od by sGttinc [',Siclo the c1iso:Lsscl c..nd cl.iroc:'.;irl{j' that tho c.ppliontion 1Jo he a.rd by the Ji;rinl tribun0l to fi11oli ty c..ncl thi'.1.t Snooo. bo porni"iitocl to n::f~o ccrtoin mondncnts to hex:· plcc,c.lin...JS• Ahduro.tif is dissc:ticfiod -with tho decision of tho Appcc',ln Jlil"'ihuncl• Tionco this nppcnl• liis nonor.:-.mlun of apponl is c'..Cconpcllicd 1)y c.· cor~ of tho juc.1Gnont of the Apponls tri1Junc..1 but not by n copy of tho dooroo, c..nd on behalf . of Ahduro.tif it hn.s boon con

tonc1od that tho rl.pporu is inconpotcnt ~1d re licnco h[',6 boon ploood upon tho provisions of ◊.I:'dGr 39 l'Ulo l of tho CiVil Procaduro Coda. In reply Mr. M<...,soe,ti hc..s cxguad tlmt thGro is no prevision in tho Rent Restriction A.ct thc..t roq_i.tlros r.'..ll n.ppollont to o.ttnoh a. copy of "iiho dooroo r4:>poru.od fro□ to his oonor::nduo of nppoO.::.. I respoetfully Cf.:.TOo w:i. th Mr., MnssGti~ UndGr section 43( 1) of tho Rent Restriction A.ct o.ppocl.s f:ron decisions or ddorniilations of the Appoc..ls tribunol lie to tho lligh Court only upon points of lr,w or nixod facts 2nd lo.,w., Under ~action (4) of thc..t soo.,i;ion tho Chief Justioo Dey raclce rules eovorning suoh 2,pponls providing for the proocdu.ro to bo followed nnd other thil1e;s. ThG Chio:f' Justice hn.s, to cy knowloclco, yot +,o oc.ko such nuos., . Thn.t sub-section GOOS on w, scy thn.t unt;tl such rules .'.'..l'.'G :Jrulc tho provisions of tho Civil Procodu:ro ·Codo shcl.l npply c.s if tho order, clccision or dotcr::.iin[',tion of tt.o Tribunr\l w~s a. doc.roq of a. court excroisillG ori.:;ina.l juriscliotion., So, in ey viOl,, tho judgoont of' tho Appccl.s tribun:'.l :i.n this on.so nu.st be docnod to bo c.. doo:r-oo of a, court oxGroising originru. jv.risc1iction 1:llld thoro is no nood to hc:vo r., dGOl"Go dro:wn up rnd 0ttoohod to tho nooormduo of nppcoJ.. Tb.a next question ·~o dc~;r.-rn;

,..,'° ; ~ ~-~;,~+.her t:.10 provisions of' section 21 · of tho llont Restriction 1'..ct is :-,,pplioo..blo to ·l;ho ld.11d of tonanoy s<rh out in Mncoturo A.,, Thnt section is in tho followinG' torD1;;il "Ub. oro,. c.i'ter tho co;:1r.10nccnont of this 11.ot, t!10 le:ndlord of' OX'fY" prcoissos, or DrJY" agent, olork or ot~ior pc.rson eor1loyod by hira, acoopts ~ ront in rospoot of such prcnisos which oxcocds·tho stMc1ad rent thor.::;of by noro thn.n an;,r r-nou11t por- mi·~"'liocl ,,,,r1r..,., +.11.:l r- '\c-1;: or, without tho proVic:t.o co11s011Ji; in wri tin{; of tho Tribunn.l accepts -en ndvCJ.100 of ront_cx.ooodi!lG two nonths' st2.nc1".1'.'d rant, than, without projudicc to c)IJY other roncdy under this oot, such Lmd.lorcl, agsnt, clerk, .or oth0r par-- son shcl.1 bo rru,::.1 ty of en offonoo nnd sli..~l upon oonviotior~ "tc liablo to r-, :f·jJ.10 not cy..ccoclil1c; si:l: thausnncl shillincrs or to ir.1prisonncnt not o.."':Osod.in.z twolyo nonths or to both such fine o..nc'.. i!:lprisonoont ••• 11 M~,. Ma,sso.ti hc.s r.1c.i11to..inod tha.t the tGntmcy r:igroo□oJ?.t con:tc.ined in Jumc.xturo A fnlls within -~ho 1J\U'V'iow of thc..t provision nnd · thdli :1. t shoulc'l not be given criy- offact by vir·~uo. of section 46( 1) o:f tho Act. Mr Koosr-.ri.6. hM ropliod nnd subnittoc'l th,,t tho parties woro °i&,-nornnt of thoso provisions of tho li:'.W e.nd th::i.t tho

provisions of s.cotions 2t, 22, 23 and 65 of tho Lo..w of Controot . . drdtnm100 should bo invoked• I however shc..ro tho opinion of Mr• Mn.sse:.ti thnt those provis:i.ons o:f tho La.w of Contrnciit. Orclinnnco· or.ru1ot override tho provisions of section 21 of tho Tient Restriction ~'I.ct.- J3ut th0t is not to sey tha.t· I ngroo with Mr• Mnse0ti I s proposi tlon that thcro WM · a. violdion of section 21 • It aoons "Go uo ·chc,t tho ~Y e:i;prossion in section· 21. for tho purpose of tho nn.ttor n.t honcl is 11 standard :rant".. Dy section 3 of -'i;ho Act thn.t torn bonrs ·t the oera1.ing 0ssicnod toJby section 16 of tho 1..ct* Dy sootion 16 "st~~_crd rent" in roln.tion to ::izzy- prcnisos noons r, rent dotorninod 1Jy t!10 Ilociohal Tribunol to be the ront nt which pronisos ncy bo let. Now thero is 110·1:ihin,g in tho pleadings of tho pn.rtios whioh shows or tonds to show thnt tho :rant i.11 rcspoct 'of tho' · suit-prcnisos h::-,a over boon dotorninec'l by tho T:dbuncl, It cr.innot, thoroforo, , be tontibly con-'i;o1tdod that tho tononcy agroonont ploc'.il.ocl 'by Snoon wn.s illognl• In C\Y ViEnr, nnd with due rospoct to the Apper.ls tribun~J., it is wronc to acy · -'Ghat section 21 o.pplios oxclusivaly to nonthly ten.:moy .1GI'·oonontse I think th('.,t cn.rofulJy xoc.cl in conjunction With section 17( 1) -'.;h;-,t s~otion o.pplies to GVo:ry kind of toncnoy o.c~oc□ont,

proviclodl' as I have hold r-..1Jovo, the sto.nd,ard ront in :rospcot of tho subjoct-nnttor e-:-,e lJoon duly clotor1!linod by tho Rogionc'.l Tribunal• .F:incl.~ I oono to considel' the question whether tho tricl tribunal wont wrollG' whon it disnissoc'l tho· o,pplicdion on tho [,TOUllc.1 t!.mt lmnoxture A wn.s ,mstnnp_oci.. As clroncly nontioncc1, the Appon.ls tribunr-J. f'2.ul tad tho trial . tribun~ for cloinc so, because, it st0tod, tho dooucont WM not p;.reparod for . tho· purpose of pcyuont of ro,nt, lJut wc,s r.1oroly oViclcnoo to support tonn.ncy :relationship 1Je·l:iweon tho pn.rtio s. Sections 5 to D of tho Stnnp Duty 1:..o.t provido for instruoonts chnrgoablo with stru:ip duty. There is nothinc in thoso provisions w~ich seys that ri. tol'l.onoy n(;TGC!:lont is ol:.....":Xc;Gc:'hlo with stDilp · cluty only wl::or-c it is for tho Pll-I'lJOSC of p1~r.1ont of rent. There is b.lso nothins i11 there whiol1 scys thi".t. an instrur10nt whioh is n. noro oVidonco of: tonMoy rclditinship between tho pm-tics is cxonpt fr:oo duty. In r.zy- View 4.nnexturo A fc.1ls µncler tho pu:cvicw of scction_5( 1) of tho Act nnc'l hrtiolo 34( a.) ( 2) of tho 5ohodule thereto f'.lld was cha.rgoo.lJlo with 5/••••••• , the 0.uty spooifiod ·therein. I3ut th2.t is not to sey Jlil:.;-,.;t tho trial tribunal was :right to clisr.1iss the applicc..tion, Mr. M.'1.ssdi rs objootion wc,s b1:.,sod on

section 46( 1) of tho Act. Tlmt provision seys Jvh0t D1lY inst:runcnt which is chargoc:,1Jlo with d.u-ey sholl not bo admitted in GVic101100 for o..ny purpose or D.Ctocl upon, rcci:,d;orod or nuthonticatcd, unless suoh ins-trur:iont is cluly' stcnpad. ll.nnexture L. wc.s 2, copy ru1d. Saad.?. had not souaht to ['.(;.c1.uoo t!10 orig-incl. in 0Viclo1100 becuusc sho he.cl not oven started ~iving evidence in support of her clcin• . It is, thoro1ora, <'..l'gunhlo · thn.t tho. objection tclccm 1Jy tho loaxn0d c..clvoc~to was a bit prcr.ir·.:tu.re. In any ovont i-'i; h:1.s been hold by this court in S1._:¥1.clerji Nc.nji Ltd v Mohnned. Ko.ssm:i Dhaloo (1959) El.. 762 and other Ct::1,ses, and I · - ~ it is good lnw, that • on · ,.· .. - . w:horo a party sooks to rely / unstcnpod docuraont which is ohargoo.blo with duty . in . support of his olmn1 tho propor- course for tho coux·t is to D,pply proviso ( a) of section 46(1 ) c.1.1d givo the party 2.11 ·opportunity to r.1.'.'.lrn it ad.oiss"iblo by peying ..... tho :requisite sJ.;c.np duty c:md tho prescribed ponn.lty, Tlio propor course is not to rojcct tho doow.1e-.11.t st:roightawcy, ouoh losr. to disoiss his ::-.ction• Tho trial tribunr.l wc.s, ·l;horeforo, in serious loe;cl. orror,. In tho finc'...1 conclusion and for t'.11 tha.t I ho.vc stc-:tod above I disniss this: t\pponl. Tho c,,ppclloJ1t is to pey tho costs. Dolivorocl Appcll~nt c'.'.:bsont Mre Kosnrio. for tho, Rosponclont.