19710101 TZHC Mwanza2
(uoTTodd st .ç Ut o).uopuodsoI oi. qoTtlioq. MOO sti ;o sso DUG. opIio. S2hII100J STtT J3 0 OOO o. uotsuodwoo lJolus a sa (qusIIodcta DU. iCq zaow D2t .snui oq) LtDpu0dsox Aq (quopuodsoi a. o. .U5Ow OT4 31UTLP i oIot[) I.UOTTodde ou. o. pçad q 0 0I 1Dt5tI00 t 0 A 0140 tI PInOLIS I - tdaiaxad rino irt ponutquoa...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19710101 TZHC Mwanza2
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 1 January 1971
- 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.
No structured case brief is available yet for this judgment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
(uoTTodd st .ç Ut o).uopuodsoI oi. qoTtlioq. MOO sti ;o sso DUG. opIio. S2hII100J STtT J3 0 OOO o. uotsuodwoo lJolus a sa (qusIIodcta DU. iCq zaow D2t .snui oq) LtDpu0dsox Aq (quopuodsoi a. o. .U5Ow OT4 31UTLP i oIot[) I.UOTTodde ou. o. pçad q 0 0I 1Dt5tI00 t 0 A 0140 tI PInOLIS I - tdaiaxad rino irt ponutquoa o qsruu q. todth-ts poonppa SaM OQUOpIAD ou qop .uiocT t. tb U0UIfl Stt[ PUS DSDp MOU St UOtqSDTtb ut DTi. POJTSTqUS wa I U0uDpt.o o. wip - oqotth I U5 Jcto.o podi Olfl JO[ DSd tdaaxadu -c oouDtxas sa - DT.. UT q.txoui?pnC s u- c PP° 13qs5w .oczstp pDuiaoi otj, °rrio0 -°T'-TP DTfl. oq. Polsodda (qnoo qotxatp ut uaTTocicta) uopuodsx ot l0050ssO ot. JO uotutcio JqtioCw DTTq. UIM PD'cIdwOO pus J1DSW P pDOoitp T.10d01CI oqiqs -t?aw qxnoo ±om -czd otq pooput so 'MDI JO D910J ou DS00 JO pO MOTA ST IOUTItM 9DM lltDttodSD D 5DM MOtA i.tI0UtW qifl00 SwtXd °oq4 ODt[ DUO ouq o. sd o. (uspuo;op isuT-T1o) uopuodso oqq. poopio pus (JJTqutaTci iOu-c9-co) tzo11othia otq jo inoz.s; u -c Tuotu?pnC oja siosoossa ou. o uottdo u AiIoCw ot. tti Doua -tldwoo ut noo isw-td aq, 0I450 STIJ 10; utqssuodtuoo —/ooq utwte - o rnoo tMuTxcI tzutIa) Ut t0ttttd'a . IqTM pDtjst.q.ss 0U S0!1 U5T1Cdd2 oi •potxnq SOM 9OIO0 oiTq. uastsss 0UTDOA S JO Sopto Sq qoq. u -cas 'as op o. poit;kuopuociso DTq tq D145O poop stq jo U140 DTTq. WtT M0TS oq. uopuodsoi po:sa USIIDdcI0 D III suDpuodSDI UtpflOUT 01q450 XOtflO JUW p0111)1 PZ3 .q TT,017M os'aostp 0fl450 tIMOtDIUfl JO otwopicto US SOM o9rIOO 0. UJ1 OSO 0- °potp OtT 0fl400 OT r pDWItJUOO J1opuoc1soI Dj 'DT45O OT.fl. JO LflODp ouq. noqa poxtnbu -t DuS pSos—owoq squopuodsoi oq. P°TP POt1S k4 tzOL1 CII tY[q450 Stt[ MOU)1 O DUJSO qusodds otjq. 6961 ITdV UI 8961 UI 0OI DWtq. ouios UOT)ttOdSDI otq o. popuSt SOM oI400 ot. sisodda q -c oouop -tio au. wxJ '&posno ojas ','?lj. 103 quoptiodsoi DT. FITY.1 ozuadW inoqtou sttj oq. -fl4DO Jo pSDt cuo pol_SurT_UD 'oacf nsaI,i quaoda ou oIrtM osoo a s -c '157 'TATZNW 'Lr iU1\IDIflf ( ' ' DNInIN ZNTdw StiSiDA (.J;IquIsId Tio)J7rr' iTfJTEI)1 io:niw / ' I (.xno;p Iiaw -cid tZutI 2 )j DI. jü 6961 JO L9 °0 1I 0520 ITATO -tUTTO ' 6961 30 6r0!I Taoddr ITATO Ut DwOPtX O .OtJSta 12UJOi1)1 JO 1.xnoo OtISI 0U JO UPtSTOD'LD DLi. woiT) oL61 JO 9?I°ON I1IctdT rli&I0(0d) UO1O1StXflf osIIoddr TZNJMW dIV (stc.j OTaqSTC, ni) IN1Z1I71 ff0 1LHfl00 RDIH iLHJ NI '1 -2-- was unable to produce either tho hoofs or the skin of the animal. 17 From tht evidence in the primary court there can be no doubt that the cattle died. It is also brought out vary clearly that there was cattle diseasepidcmic in the area. Neither tire primary court nor the Oistrict couet en cleavoured to find out the nature of the disease and the extent it afectod i cattle in the area. L veteriiary assistant, I\iussa Shabani, has however givoovidenou in this court rcarding the epidemic . He said the area in which the parties lived wc affected by an epidemic of east coast favor as a result of which many catle died. s regards the cattle in dispute he said in this court and I \cjuote - "The cattle in dispute was shom to mc after it had died. I could see that it had a swelling on its neck. I dissected the swelling and saw that it was filled with pus and extremely sc:ptic. I was not sure what type of disease the cow died from. I advised the respondent to have it buried. I also 'S told them that the body could be eaten but not the neck and hoad." From the aovc evidence, which testimony I have no reason to question, I fail t see how the respondent can be held responsible for the death of apcl1ant's cattle. The 1erimar court magistrate 's minority opinion was sound although a I have already Intioned hc had no alternative but to abide with the erroneous majority pinion of the assessors. fs to the dcision of the learned district magistrate that the respondent (ooigina appellant) thculd pay shs o 50/ to the appellant (original resi:ondcnt\) to cool appellant's feelings, I fail to sac the alidity of tis ordr. The death ofNasudi's cattle was clearly from some malady of which Npanzc, the respondort, is not in any way to i)lame. In the event I have no alternative but to sot aside the order of the district magistrate. Lnd consequently the appeal fails. The rocpondcnt is to have his costs. - t ON cin,rT- J o