20171121 TZHC Dar es Salaam

20171121 TZHC Dar es Salaam

The plaintiff is the lawful owner of the disputed land by virtue of a registered right of occupancy. The 1st defendant unlawfully entered and constructed a house on the plaintiff's land, constituting trespass. There is no evidence that the defendants demolished the plaintiff's fence. The claim for compensation for the destroyed fence fails. The plaintiff is entitled to an eviction order against the 1st defendant but not to general damages or costs.

Citation
20171121 TZHC Dar es Salaam
Parties
Plaintiff: Buyuni Company Limited; 1st Defendant: Umudi Issa; 2nd Defendant: Bakari Selemani Momba; 3rd Defendant: Bakari Said Hemed
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
21 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Outcome
Suit partly allowed for plaintiff; counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Right of Occupancy, Trespass, Eviction, Compensation for Developments, General Damages
Source Language
English
Land Law Right of Occupancy Trespass Eviction Compensation for Developments General Damages

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Buyuni Company Limited

Plaintiff

Umudi Issa

1st Defendant

Bakari Selemani Momba

2nd Defendant

Bakari Said Hemed

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who is the rightful owner of the land in dispute?
  2. 2 Whether the defendants trespassed into the land in dispute?
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff suffered damages from the alleged trespass?

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is the lawful owner of the disputed land by virtue of a registered right of occupancy. The 1st defendant unlawfully entered and constructed a house on the plaintiff's land, constituting trespass. There is no evidence that the defendants demolished the plaintiff's fence. The claim for compensation for the destroyed fence fails. The plaintiff is entitled to an eviction order against the 1st defendant but not to general damages or costs.

Court Disposition

Suit partly allowed for plaintiff; counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Plaintiff declared lawful owner of the disputed land.
  • Eviction order granted against 1st defendant.