19940810 TZHC Dodoma
Criminal proceedings are not appropriate where ownership of land is disputed; parties should be advised to pursue civil action to determine ownership.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19940810 TZHC Dodoma
- Parties
- Appellant: Bakari Mpanda; Respondent: Ghilumayu Nathielcol; Amicus Curiae: Mr. Kifunda
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 10 August 1994
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Criminal Trespass, Land Ownership, Procedure for Ownership Disputes
- 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
Bakari Mpanda
Appellant
Ghilumayu Nathielcol
Respondent
Mr. Kifunda
Amicus Curiae
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether criminal proceedings are appropriate when land ownership is disputed
- 2 Proper procedure for resolving land ownership disputes
Ratio Decidendi
Criminal proceedings are not appropriate where ownership of land is disputed; parties should be advised to pursue civil action to determine ownership.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal fails and is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
li.PPELIJ~'.15.J .JO:RISDI arr 01:~ .,<'t (PC) HIGH C0UR'l' CB.HID-JAL APP.CAL NO. 4 OF 1994 ORIGilfil CRI!V[D:Ti1L JI-..P:P.EA.L NO,. 6~ OF 1993 OF THE DISTRI(;T COUU.T 01:· STI~GIDA DISTRICT AT SUlGIDA DEFORE, IoJ. YJ~':i.1.I~LA Esq., DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BAKARI MPANDA • • • 0 • • • • • o APPELLANT versus GHiU1!AYU N.ATII!:liL'C8L • • • • • • • • RESPONJ)ENT 1 MS OFF.i}k J. g The appellant won in a Criminal action he filed bef~re the Primary Court at Mtinkog Singida a~;ainst the respondents for the offence of trespassing or forcefully entering into his 1and after which the said respondents were en.ca sentenced to pay a fine of shs. 5,.000/== or four months imprisonment ir1 clefaul t" Disatisfied th8 respondents successfully appealed to the Dist:i:'ict Court at Singidae The appellant is disatisfied by the decision of the District Court 2nd hence this appeal., I have eone through the relevent record. It is quite apparent that at the centre of controversy oetween the respective parties is ownership over a certain piece of land with each side claiming to be the lawful owner of the same.. v1hile the appellant avers that he cleared it in 1976 the respondents say it belongs to them in that it was left to them by their fatr,ers w~1.o died in 1986. The learned Tiistrict Magistrate sitting in the first ~~peal properly stated the legal position on a matter of this nature/ i.e. that when two or more people claim ownership of the same land.the Court should always advise them to proceed by way of Civil actione l,K's ~ notable is t,::,.a.t obtai'.1i.n~; i:.1 thG Case of Saidi Juma v R. ( 1968) •• .,/2 , " ""' UL, ~ ·when ih a Case of C:rim.inal -trespass~ a, dispute ·a:itises as to the ownership of the land, the Court should not proceed with the criminal charge and. should advise the complainant t• brin;2; a Civil action to determine the question of ownership. 11 In the instant Case the appellant could~ and actually still can i,rocead .a.eai.nst the :i::·espondents by Hay of Civil action (subject· ~t: -ee,.urse to the Law ~f Limitation if applicable in the circumstances) H as pro-penil'[ .advised by the Dist:dct agistrate. Mr. Kifunda learned. St.ate Atterney who appeared as ah1.ic11s curiae a.J.:so aupp~rts. this vielol• Fer the above reason tho am1eal fails and it is accordingly .d j .smi~ It. j..s so cr.dered,, 10/8/1994 Delivered. Appellant - Absent. Respondents - Absent. :rrir. Kifunda - State Attorney ~;r}~ 10/3/1994 . .