19930520 TZCA Dar es Salaam
The appeal was incompetent due to lack of leave for a second appeal as required by statute.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19930520 TZCA Dar es Salaam
- Parties
- Appellant: Ard Allah Pazi Pehibd and Three Others; Respondent: Union A. Transport Society
- Court
- TZCA
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 20 May 1993
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Struck Out
- Outcome
- appeal struck out
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Competency, Leave to Appeal, Land Ownership
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ard Allah Pazi Pehibd and Three Others
Appellant
Union A. Transport Society
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Struck Out
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave was required and obtained for a second appeal under Section 5(2)(a) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act
- 2 Whether the appellants are rightful owners of the disputed land
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was incompetent due to lack of leave for a second appeal as required by statute.
Court Disposition
appeal struck out
Orders
- appeal struck out with costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
., IN THE COURT OF 1lPPEAL OF TA11iZANIA .·. 4!,.~fil~ALMJ1 {.£~: M.AKA!:~...1,..i[.o.4~1§.:£.1.IT94L_-T.tA•.a.-4?ld_.QtI.@.,_l.~ CIVIL AFIEAL J':O. 12 OF 1992 · BE'J.1i-IH,'EN ARD ALLAH PAZI PEI':IBD MID THREE OTHERS O o o O c 0 t' O • • • APFELLANTS AWJ Ui'l[()J A. TR.Al\1SFORT SOCIN.!:Y. 000000 RES FONDE1'111 ('Appeal from the Judgment of the P,igh Court of Ta..,zai1iii at Dar es Salaam) (]~1.ill:.tJ, .J 4,) dated the 20th da.y of Deo6mbe:r• 1990 in -~t!iv:i.l .......... -Anre!11r,0~ ;2·b,<ot.~ . ~ --•"-·•-·,;;., ' 87 ...... 0 W•tt t:6~- · Thia appeal arise.s i'J.JOftl t~1e Judgement of the. Hi8h Court. . . affirming the decision of the Res1dant. Ma.3is-t.r.ata'~ Court in a suit involvin{3 a dispute over a pieoe of land~ The appella11ts olaim that they are :r>ig}1tful owners of the. disputed la11d w,.1ich they have oocupied as villace11e., .having inherited it £!'Om J.;heir grandfath~s.. On -the other hand. the respondents assert that the •land j..a l'e.gistered 1ahd which they acquired from the provious registered. O\'mer, one Me:ali Metha, ' . in 1977 w:ho li~ ~rod. ~ rieht 4Jf oocu~ ~ l ' it... in ~O. Both Courta belo..t fount !OJ: the ~ t s , ano. f~her re je.cted the appellants 1 •Qla.im tliat. tlwy ¥ filsd i):l. t~ plemlj.nge a counter-cla.im . i ~ tl\8. is.sue of eamp;:nsa;l;i~, At the hearing of the appaal the iss,v,a was r.aised that . ' . this being a sec«1,1c1 a.Pi~, leave was rec:ruireo. to bring it in terms o,;f Section ): '(~ -~q.). o,£ ~~ AP1'.lO_ll,a.to J ~ i ~ J).Ot,. but - 2 ... no such leave had been obtained •. Indeed there is no indioation t from the record of any. such leave having boon obtained or sought~ That obviously rend.e:rs the t,.ppeal incompetent. T-Je also heard,. although only in passing, some arguments on ·the merits of the appaal itself, but in view of the decision whioh we have taken we ca.n.not ~r~ now oxpresa opinion on the lllt.9rits of' the appeal. This appeal, having been .foqnd to be inoompetent, is accordingly struck out with costs. 1993. t.M, M/J<:/.1ME JUS'PICE aa e OF IFtCrtC APPE/.L •• R.H. KISJ.LNGA :JUST.ICE Of • .J+m/4: ./J. .M. 1~. OMJJl ~USTlCE OF. lJ'l!!J.t• 0. I oert.ii:;y that this is a -tru~ cow of tha o'riginal... ,f 1t11 v:11 ilt,, !/19-J.i. I , • 1 •-._,J ( L, B. KJJJi.l •;;. .. A ) .~EfilOY DEFUTY, REQIST~.IUt I ' ' t , ..