avunilwa silas makono vs tanga city council and another 2012 tzhclandd 123 1 november 2012

avunilwa silas makono vs tanga city council and another 2012 tzhclandd 123 1 november 2012

Although the appellant was the first occupant, the re-survey and upgrading process altered the plot sizes and arrangements, making it impractical to restore the appellant's original plot. The allocation to the 2nd respondent was unlawful, but demolition of her permanent structure would not restore the appellant's position. The appellant's best remedy is to accept the alternative plot and compensation for unexhausted improvements.

Citation
avunilwa silas makono vs tanga city council and another 2012 tzhclandd 123 1 november 2012
Parties
Appellant: Avunilwa Silas Makono; 1st Respondent: Tanga City Council; 2nd Respondent: Mwansiti Amiri
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Land Case Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From District Land and Housing Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Allocation of Land, Compensation for Land, Title to Land, Eviction, Land Survey and Upgrading
Source Language
English
Land Law Allocation of Land Compensation for Land Title to Land Eviction Land Survey and Upgrading

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Avunilwa Silas Makono

Appellant

Tanga City Council

1st Respondent

Mwansiti Amiri

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Land Case Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From District Land and Housing Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, being the first occupant, was entitled to retain the plot over the 2nd respondent
  2. 2 Whether the allocation of the plot to the 2nd respondent by the 1st respondent was lawful
  3. 3 Whether the appellant was entitled to compensation and an alternative plot

Ratio Decidendi

Although the appellant was the first occupant, the re-survey and upgrading process altered the plot sizes and arrangements, making it impractical to restore the appellant's original plot. The allocation to the 2nd respondent was unlawful, but demolition of her permanent structure would not restore the appellant's position. The appellant's best remedy is to accept the alternative plot and compensation for unexhausted improvements.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appellant to accept the alternative plot allocated by the 1st respondent.
  • Appellant to be compensated for unexhausted improvements in the original plot.