Civil Appeal No
The merger was a policy decision sanctioned at national level, assets were acquired for the benefit of the larger community, and compensation to the appellants would contradict the purpose of Ujamaa policy.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- Civil Appeal No
- Parties
- Appellant: Athuman Ismail; Appellant: D.B.S. Zimbihile, Mr.; Respondent: J. Village Council: Kijiji Tukutuku; Respondent: Salum Issa
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 1 January 1987
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Village Merger, Ujamaa Policy, Compensation for Assets
- 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
Athuman Ismail
Appellant
D.B.S. Zimbihile, Mr.
Appellant
J. Village Council: Kijiji Tukutuku
Respondent
Salum Issa
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the merger of Magombe village with other villages and the acquisition of assets was lawful
- 2 Whether the appellants are entitled to compensation for assets acquired during the merger
Ratio Decidendi
The merger was a policy decision sanctioned at national level, assets were acquired for the benefit of the larger community, and compensation to the appellants would contradict the purpose of Ujamaa policy.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- no costs awarded to either side
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN TH-E COURT OF AfrEAL OF TAJ.~ ZA;.v IA AT MWAJ.~ZA (CORAM; MUSTAFA, J;.A., aMAR, J.A. And MAfIGAUO, Ag. J!A.) CIVIL AfFEAL i-o , 7 OF 1987 IivTHE MATTER OF Al~ IJ.vTEL~DEJ) AFFEAL ATHUMA!. ISMAIL • AfFFLLM.TS D. B. S. ZIMBIHIL~, Mf. ~. • • VERSUS J.. VILLAGE COU!~CIL: KIJIJI TUKUTUKU I SALmI I'3SA • I ,,' (Appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Tanzania at Mwanza) (Munyera, J.) dated 3rd July, 1984 in Civil Case Na. 53 of 1982 .- ,- - JUDGMELvT OF OktlAR,J'.A.:_ Having perused the judgment of my brother Mapigano, Ag. J.A-. I would agree with him that the merger of this Magombe village' with ~ight other villages to form Tukutuku village was a poliey decision and was sanctioned by C.C.M. (Chama cha Mapinduzi) at national level. Tukutuku village was registered under Villageg and Ujamaa Villages Act, 1975. The assets of Eg omb e village whose villagers are represen~ed by the appellants, were acquired through Government grants or loans and these facilities were offered in pursu~nce of Ujamaa-policy and development. Of course being owned by a few,people the benefits accruing from them were substantial.Now that a larger number of p~9ple were sharing the same profits the Igombe villagers would ctrtainl~ ge Garningless in the first formative years and this is what i~k~d the villagers to the extent that ~.hey brought this sui t and. til",yclaimed compensation 9! Shs. 382,000/- after which they would continue to be part of the larger CommuT1i ty of- nine .•villages. But would this not amount to having your cake and eating it too. It is in this context that claims of appellants were dismi~ged in the High Court and similar fate is be falling them in this .' C our t • fhe' a~m 0f ujamaa policy is the greatest happineS3 ef the greatest number and any undertaking in the ujamaa village is geared to that end. " 2 I would dismiss this appeal as did my brother r.1apigano, Ag. J. A., and awar-d no costs to either side. \ . DATEDat MI"11.UZA- this 21st day of August, 1987 • .~. M. A. OMAR ! JUSTICE OF APPEAL \" " " 1: .certify that this is a true copy of'.'t"he original •...• (J. ~I If. MSOF~) DEPUTYREGISTRAR '. ' .. ·t·.'