batholomayo tluway vs john tluway dalei 2 others 2023 tzhc 22518 8 november 2023

batholomayo tluway vs john tluway dalei 2 others 2023 tzhc 22518 8 november 2023

The appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that he redeemed the land and acquired title. The evidence established that the mother redeemed and gifted the land to the 1st respondent. The doctrine of adverse possession did not apply as the appellant had a color of right and was not in adverse occupation. Allegations of fraud were not properly pleaded or proved. The DLHT's findings were upheld, and the appellant's grounds of appeal were dismissed.

Citation
batholomayo tluway vs john tluway dalei 2 others 2023 tzhc 22518 8 november 2023
Parties
Appellant: Bartholomayo Tluway; 1st Respondent: John Tluway Dalei; 2nd Respondent: Faustine Stephano Dambay; 3rd Respondent: Levina Zakayo
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
8 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Land Appeal / First Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Ownership of Land, Adverse Possession, Burden of Proof, Sale Agreements, Fraud Allegations
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Ownership of Land Adverse Possession Burden of Proof Sale Agreements Fraud Allegations

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bartholomayo Tluway

Appellant

John Tluway Dalei

1st Respondent

Faustine Stephano Dambay

2nd Respondent

Levina Zakayo

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Land Appeal / First Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant proved ownership of the disputed land
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of adverse possession applies to the appellant
  3. 3 Whether the DLHT erred in admitting or rejecting sale agreements

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that he redeemed the land and acquired title. The evidence established that the mother redeemed and gifted the land to the 1st respondent. The doctrine of adverse possession did not apply as the appellant had a color of right and was not in adverse occupation. Allegations of fraud were not properly pleaded or proved. The DLHT's findings were upheld, and the appellant's grounds of appeal were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Decision of the District Land and Housing Tribunal upheld except for the declaration of lawful ownership.
  • Appellant failed to establish title to the disputed land.