19700616 TZHC Mwanza2 2
The registration of the disputed land in the respondent's mother's name, combined with the evidence, outweighs the appellant's claim of joint purchase; thus, the lower courts' findings are upheld.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19700616 TZHC Mwanza2 2
- Parties
- Appellant: Bi. Anastazia Temalilwi; Respondent: Bi. Asteria Jeremiah
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 16 June 1970
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Land Ownership, Registration of Title, Burden of Proof
- 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
Bi. Anastazia Temalilwi
Appellant
Bi. Asteria Jeremiah
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the disputed land was purchased solely by the respondent's late mother or jointly with the appellant
- 2 Whether registration of land ownership determines rightful ownership
Ratio Decidendi
The registration of the disputed land in the respondent's mother's name, combined with the evidence, outweighs the appellant's claim of joint purchase; thus, the lower courts' findings are upheld.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- No interference with lower courts' findings
- Respondent's ownership affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
- T.1 17. TIi CC)UI.T OF TA21\1 11I.. 111 (In the District Registry.) AT MWANZA. APPELLATE JURISDICTION. (pa) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 29 OF 1970 (From the decision of 4he District Courtof Bukoba District at Bukoba in Civil Appeal No.2 of 1969. Oinal Ndawanilo Civil Case No.225 of 1968.) BI. ANASTAZIA TEMALILWIj. . . . . ... . .. . . . APPELLANT(Original Defendant) vs. BI. ASTERIA JEREMIAH. . . . . . . . . . . . RESPONDSNT(Original Prosec. ) JUDGMENT. MNZAVAS, IIG,J. The respondent sued the appellant in the Ndwanilo primary court claiming a portion of ]Jand and won the case. The appellant appealed to the district court wher'e she again lost the case. She has now come to this Court0 At least two witnesses gave evidence supporting the respondent that the land in question was purchased by respondent's late mother. There was also some evidence that the respondent's mother after payment of shs.80f- as purchase price was duly registered as the buyer and owner of the disputed land - see evidence of b.w.l Felician Kaina. The appellant in her defence insisted that she and rspondent's mother jointly bought the shamba, each paying shs.40/_ towards purchase price. She brought two witnesses to support her testimony. The primary coui't magistrate after thorough scrutiny of the evidence came to the conclusion that plaintiff testimony and that of his witnesses was to be believed. Both assessors who sat with him were also of the opinio: that the land belonged Ito the responden's late mother. This finding of fact was upheld by the 1istrict court. As far as witneèses are concerned there was as much evidence in favour of the appellantlas thOre was evidence in favour of the respondent. If the matter was to ret here the respondent could have lost the case. But there was the evidence that the land in dispute was, after the purchase, registered in the name of respondent's mother. The appellant does not say why the land was registred in respondent's mother's name and not in her name; or atleast why her name was not jointly registered with that of the respondent's motherlif, as alleged by her, the land was jointly purchas. In my view the r reponderance of probabilities heavily weighs againc.t the appellant. I see nc valid reason to interfere with the finding of fact of the lower courts whic h is fully supported by the evidence. Mwanza, Jut.• c.-' 16th June, 1 97 0 - (N4. MNZA 1 j .•Angdge.