Joining the registrar of titles in a registered suit dispute Amosi Boniface v Salehe Shabani Tangira

THE JUDICIARY OF TANZANIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA AT KIGOMA LAND APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2023 AMOS BONIFACE .............................. COMPLAINANT / APPELLANT / APPLICANT / PLAINTIFF VERSUS SALEHE SHABANI TANGIRA .............................. RESPONDENT / DEFENDANT RULING J. NKWABI, J, 12 & 12/11/2024 As correctly summarized by the trial tribunal, parties to this appeal are vying for ownership of a piece of land which is under Plot No. 1688 Block “U” Murusi in Kasulu Township. The appellant disputed the surveying and the plot number saying nothing of the sort happened. The appellant testified in the trial tribunal that the disputed plot was allocated to him by Kidyama Village council back in the year 2002. After a full hearing, the trial tribunal declared the respondent lawful owner of the disputed piece of land. It ordered costs to the respondent as well. The appellant was aggrieved with that decree. He is appealing to this Court while having six grounds. Parties filed their respective written submissions. Truly, the appellant is praying for the about to be mentioned reliefs: 1. The judgment, proceedings and decree of district land and housing tribunal be declared null and void. 2. The appellant be declared the rightful owner of the suit property. 3. Costs of the case be upon the respondent. This Court, when it went through the respective parties’ submissions for and against the appeal and the decision in Nestory Msoffe & 5 Others v. The Registered Trustees of Catholic Archdiocese of Arusha, Civil Appeal No. 254 of 2019, I invited the parties to address the Court on the failure to join the Commissioner for Lands in the suit, and if the Commissioner for Land is joined whether the trial tribunal would have jurisdiction to entertain the Page. 1 matter. Replying to my probing, Mr. Michael Mwangati, learned counsel for the appellant, conceded that since the suit land appears to have been surveyed, then, necessary parties ought to be joined to the suit and once such parties are joined the trial tribunal ceases to have the requisite jurisdiction. He prayed the proceedings, judgment and decree of the trial tribunal be quashed without an order for costs. When the respondent was called upon to respond, he intimated that he is lay man at law, so he is unaware of the correct procedure and left it to the Court to decide. In fact, in Nestory Msoffe & 5 Others v. The Registered Trustees of Catholic Archdiocese of Arusha, Civil Appeal No. 254 of 2019, CAT, it was ruled that: “... it was incumbent on the High Court to be keen enough and require the parties to amend the pleadings and join the Registrar of titles who is alleged to have register the respondent’s property in question held under Certificate of Title. Since it is clear that the Registrar of Titles had a roe in the registration of the land in question, the non- joinder of her in the suit before the High Court means that the Registrar was not heard which occasioned a miscarriage of justice which cannot be condoned by the Court and determining the present appeal. In the result, we have no option but to annul the trial proceedings and the impugned judgment.” Be that as it may, since Mr. Mwangati has conceded that indeed, the Commissioner for Lands ought to be joined to the suit, which situation ousts the jurisdiction of the trial tribunal and the respondent has left it to the Court to decide, I proceed to rule that the proceedings, judgment and the decree of the trial tribunal are nullity for failure to join the Commissioner for Lands and other necessary parties. Under the Government Proceedings Act, suits against the Government are supposed to be instituted in the High Court, thus, the trial tribunal had no requisite jurisdiction to entertain the matter. In that regard, this Court cannot order for a trial de novo. On account of the above discussion, I nullify the proceedings of the trial tribunal. Further to that, I quash the judgment and set aside the decree of the trial tribunal. As the anomaly was raised by this Court suo motu, I make no order as to costs. It is so ordered. Dated at KIGOMA ZONE this 12th of November 2024. Page. 2 J. . NKWABI, J JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT Page. 3