Asia Shaban

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE SUB-REGISTRY OF MANYARA

AT BABATI LAND APPEAL NO. 234 OF 2024 (Originating from Land Application No 5 0/2023 in the Kiteto District Land and Tribunal) ASIA SHABANI ........................................... APPELLANT

VERSUS JUMA RAJABU ........................................ RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT 5thMarch and 25thApril, 2024 MIRINDO, J.: Asia Shabani sued Juma Rajabu for declaration of ownership of ten acres of land situated at Kijungu Village in Kiteto District. Before Kiteto District Land and Housing Tribunal, she claimed that the disputed land was allocated to her in 2008 by Kijungu Village Council. The trial proceeded ex parte and she testified that Juma Rajabu invaded four acres of land out of the ten acres owned by her. She testified that she lost her certificate of right of occupancy and produced a police loss report. Her evidence was supported by a witness who stated being among persons who were allocated land in 2008 together with Asia Shabani. The tribunal held that in the absence of minutes of a village council or village assembly, there was no evidence of proof and dismissed her application. l In James Madeha v Juma Rajabu, Land Appeal 236 of 2024, decided together with this appeal, I had the occasion to address this point in some details. In the present appeal, I will only emphasize that minutes of a village council or village assembly are simply one way of proving ownership or possession of land. In the present appeal, Asia Shabani attached “Cheti cha Kibali cha Haki Miliki Isiyo Asili” in her pleading but unfortunately this document was not tendered in evidence. It is a principle of fair hearing re-emphasized in Moses Muhagama Laurance v

Government o f Zanzibar (Criminal Appeal 17 of 2002) [2003] TZCA 3 (31 October 2003) and Simon Chatanda v Abul Kisoma (1973) LRT No 11 that presiding officers in courts of law or tribunals should guide unrepresented litigants provided that they maintain their impartiality. In the circumstances of this case, it can safely be held that even if the document were to be admitted it would have been of little evidential value. The document does not provide sufficient particulars of the plot in which the derivative right was issued as the boundaries are unclear. In the present appeal, I am satisfied that there was insufficient evidence to prove ownership of the disputed land. While the loss report was one set of evidence needed in this case to indicate that the certificate of title was missing, it was necessary to prove its existence through other means. The significance of other evidence is necessitated by the fact that Asia Shabani did not remember the number of the certificate of title. There should have been, for example, proof of minutes of the village council or village assembly indicating that Asia Shabani 2 was allocated a piece of land at Kijungu Village; or production of the village register indicating allocation and size of the disputed land to Asia Shabani. It does not follow that when a person does not give evidence, as was in this case, the matter stands proved. The evidence adduced must by itself be sufficient or at least raise a prima facie case. In the present appeal, there was no such evidence. From what I have stated above, I dismiss the appeal. Each party to bear its own costs. DATED at BABATI this 23rd day of April, 2024

JUDGE COURT: Judgment delivered this 25th day of April, 2024 in the present of both parties. B/C: William Makori (RMA) present. 25/ 4/2024 3