byela kokueleza SCANNED
- Citation
- byela kokueleza SCANNED
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TANZLII
- Decision
- 1 January 2024
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TANZLII
- Decision
- 1 January 2024
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The application was dismissed because the supporting affidavit and documents were marred with elements of fraud and untruths, rendering them unreliable and invalid for supporting the relief sought.
Court disposition
application dismissed
02
Material facts
Parties
Byela Kokueleza Tibesigwa
Applicant Counsel: Geofrey MushumbusiSofia Salehe Abdallah
1st RespondentThe Registrar of Titles
2nd RespondentThe Attorney General
3rd Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the caveat entered by the 1st respondent should be removed from the land registry
- 02
Whether the applicant's affidavit and supporting documents are valid and truthful
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Applicant sought removal of caveat entered by 1st respondent, claiming caveator abandoned her caveat and failed to initiate any legal proceedings regarding ownership. Applicant asserted need to sell property for medical expenses and presented sale agreement and heirs' consent.
- Respondent
- Respondents did not appear or file counter affidavits; 1st respondent was served by publication but defaulted to show up.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Ignazio Messina vs Willow Investment SPRL, Civil Application No. 21 of 2001, CAT
An affidavit tainted with untruths is no affidavit at all and cannot be relied upon to support an application.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The application was dismissed because the supporting affidavit and documents were marred with elements of fraud and untruths, rendering them unreliable and invalid for supporting the relief sought.
Obiter and limits
- Heirs should have taken appropriate legal action regarding the applicant's mental status and appointment as legal representative instead of committing fraud and dishonest acts.
Court disposition
application dismissed
Source and reliance status
TANZLII · 1 January 2024
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TANZLII
Judgment· 1 January 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION)
AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO. 6239 OF 2024 BYELA KOKUELEZA TIBESIGWA (The Administratrix of the Estate of the Late Edson Kyaruzi Tibesigwa).............. ................... APPLICANT
VERSUS SOFIA SALEHE ABDALLAH (As Administratrix of the Estate of the Late Salehe Abdallah Mohamed)........................ .......1st RESPONDENT THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES.................... ...................2nd RESPONDENT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL............... ................. 3rd RESPONDENT
RULING 24/04/2024 to 15/05/2024 E.B. LUVANDA, J The Applicant named above is seeking for an order for the First Respondent named above to be summoned to appear to show cause why a caveat with FDNO 2034433 of 5/07/2019 which she entered to the land Registry in respect of house situated at Plot No. 191 Mbezi Beach Kinondoni Municipality Dar es Salaam with certificate of title No. 28060 subject matter of this application should be removed in the Land Registry. In the alternative, the Applicant is craving for the Court to issue order to the Second Respondent named above to remove a caveat with FDNO 203433 of 5/07/2019 which was entered by the First Respondent to the Land Registry in respect of house situated at Plot No. 191, Mbezi Beach, Kinondoni Municipality-Dar es Salaam with certificate of title No. 28060. In the affidavit in support, the deponent asserted that she is the administratrix of the estate of the late Edson Kyaruzi Tibesigwa, as per annexure BK-1 to the affidavit. That in the course of collecting the properties of her father the late Edson Kyaruzi Tibesigwa, she discovered that a house situated at Plot No. 191, Mbezi Beach, Kinondoni Municipality, belong to her father. That she has been under medical treatment since 2022 and currently she is hospitalized at Kairuki after her health was worsen, and she need a lot of money for medication, as per annexure BK-8. That on
28/11/2023 she met the prospective buyers of the suit house one Emilian Evody Rwejuna and Diane Mwake Wamunza, and executed a sale agreement annexure BK- 6 to the affidavit. That the prospective buyers applied for an official search report to the Registrar of Titles, and on 30/06/2023 they were granted official report revealing that there was a caveat entered by the First Respondent, as per annexure BK-5 to the affidavit. That the caveator contended in her caveat that she would soon open a case to the court of law in order to determine the ownership of the suit property, but up to now five 2 years have already elapsed and there is neither any case preferred by the First Respondent to the court nor efforts have been made to find the Applicant, arguing this is a proof that the First Respondent has abandoned her caveat. Mr. Geofrey Mushumbusi learned Counsel for Applicant, made submission in support of the application which b large was aligned to the affidavit deposition and reliefs sought in the chamber summons. It be noted that, the Second and Third Respondent defaulted to appear neither filed their counter affidavit, irrespective of a fact that they acknowledged court summons. The First Respondent was served by way of publication vide Daily News dated 13/04/2024 and Mwananchi dated 13/04/2024, but defaulted to show up. Hence the matter proceeded in their absentia. Going by the
affidavit and documentation in support of this application, there are some controversial issues and facts. This application purport to have been made by the said Byela Kokueleza Tibesigwa who is purported to have deposed the facts in affidavit within her knowledge and signed it. However, a medical report annexure BK-8 to the 3 affidavit, the Assistant Chief Medical Officer-Kairuki Hospital, confirmed that the said Byela Tibesigwa is admitted at their facility, and opined that she is still under stabilization phase. This is in tandem with the averment in paragraph fourteen of the affidavit in support of this application. In a medial report for Ms. Byela Tibesigwa by Psychiatric Clinic-Gaborone, dated 21/02/2023, part of annexure BK-3 to the affidavit, Dr. Zoran Zoric, MD and Senior Consultant Psychiatrist opined that, I bold section of concern or relevant to this application, "Ms. Byela Tibesigwa has been a patient of the Clinic since 19.01.2023 when she was, for the first time, psychiatrically assessed at the Clinic. She was diagnosed with a medical conditions (P23 F10 The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorder WHO)' Treatment was commenced. Her condition has, somewhat, improved but has remained volatile and unsteady with bouts of aggressiveness and unpredictable behaviour" In annexure BK-8 to the affidavit, which is a medical report by Kairuki Hospital for
Byeala Tibesigwa, dated 29/02/2024, at the second paragraph, the Assistant Chief Medical Officer, opined, I bold portion of concern, 4 'She is a known patient diagnosed to have Schisophremia and alcohol intoxication' I sought assistance from Google, who defined "Schisophremia", to mean, I bold a portion suiting the circumstances of the case at hand, disorder that effects a person's ability to think, feet and behave clearly" Annexure BK-8 to the affidavit, is a very current medical report regarding the mental status of Byela Tibesigwa (49 anos) whose facts stated in the affidavit purportedly were deposed to the best of her own knowledge. The purported sale agreement of unit property annexure BK-6 to the affidavit, suggest was executed by the so called Legal Representative of Byera Kokueleza Tibesigwa. The alleged legal representative of the said Byera Kokueleza Tibesigwa is anonymous. A signature in annexure BK-6 looks similar to the one appearing in the affidavit in support of this application. But the said signatures appearing in the affidavit in support of this application and annexure BK-6, differ materially with a signature of the administratrix of the estate of the late Edson Kyaluzi Tibesigwa, who was dully appointed by the probate court and executed her deed in a letter of appointment annexure BK-1 to the affidavit. In fact, the so called legal 5 representative of Byela
Kokueleza Tibesigwa who executed annexure BK-6 and whose signature resemble with a signature appearing in the affidavit in support, was attempting to imitate a signature appearing in a letter of administration of estate Form No. IV, annexure BK-1. The general rule is that an affidavit which is marred with elements of fraud and untruths facts, amount to no affidavit at all. In the case of Ignazio Messina vs Willow Investment SPRL, Civil Application No. 21 of 2001, CAT, at page 4, the apex Court commented, "An affidavit which is tainted with untruths is no affidavit at ali and cannot be relied upon to support an application. False evidence cannot be acted upon to solve any issue. The falsehood in this case goes to the root of the application because the applicant has already dishonestly frustrated the execution of the decree" Surprisingly, the so called heirs of the late Edson Kyaruzi Tibesigwa, namely: Magret Mugisha Kemilembe Tibesigwa, Nakasinge Rwenyagira Tibesigwa, Eva Tibesigwa and Loy Tibesigwa rushed to make the so called heirs consent annexure BK-4 to the affidavit, purporting to make a resolution for sale of the suit property. It was expected for them to take appropriate and affirmative legal action navigating with the situation of Byela Kokueleza 6 Tibesigwa vis-a-vis her appointment as legal representative of the estate of late Edson Kyaruzi Tibesigwa, instead of embarking into committing fraud and dishonest acts. For the above stated reasons, this application deserves to be dismissed. 7
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.