19801113 TZHC Mbeya

- j 1 oTd e uo s tioiu.s 0N4 aIeM eJe. 'oxoj:oJet% .pxt otq et txt etto ppl POMOIV O trçpnq .t? 0J bo.T i totd et tzo t?1t JUdU3.D.O&Ie oq. MQtTt 0 tJ'3T4 pu1 pUXj J!etj A' PUOS 1-°O Lx Ta' Veupder vtrttav sciex 'fifr. eo o3i.&e 'oaa ijts . x -p pu oo t- ycj S VI40 jm peot - :• OIj °'° I P$ U1P StA-UOi t1tIX. ttOp '0S ST OtM OJIM s.pestaoepêqq- oicd JoAeMotj sd±cI os dtnd eth 'i'eto urcti pEd eis exo;eq peip -/OG XOtio. oId et. iies o, paaaDv eq u@lqA& tzotqpimoj ai4 peonxqsuoO Rpuaalu pt pesucoep e •ptiep MDU sç OqM eTTUTs iUXq euo tio.x; e.nrisçp uT qo -Ed e1in0q Stt flOQ LxoUpx OT PT-04. TtZtptXflJ3J 0/p ttrt zot3.xeptsuoo xepun Iodthi ei. eOUa11 Co 6[1 idCI sitteddt eq 014 uo pe.oe.Ie puq 8ts trçp[nq tsTxIep inos eqs tqq. peioIo osp slum 1j SSOO TM ITILTUMM9 op VU7ay zo; ue -ç st erie1pn •.Jfl03 Lluawcl trJtrçuJ Ot oxo;eq .otct upçnq . 3oLIaAooeI aqq, xo; T=Xlptmu 0 /P iuçiu uepuodse.t. eq. cq pens stim erctaelrq o/p qsaLaa -Luaddv Sq4 irç quopcIdt aqj oicI tflpflrnq t ie& eqndsp si sTq - ian NVIOTM VNIIAIV SflS.191i. -. 1NVn1r.aV (. •*s S ... 5* 5 S *• S. S S• S rflJ/rflJ UT qort twtoop et. 645 Q t It rX ri(p \AJfrV7 VS • .2e . Ad.nAés striAott.e bnd the appeliants temporary stxiicture4 The present dispute arose when Amiha saw her friend starting to build another structure on the plot and she went to report the matter to the local elders and also a member of the plot allocation Committee j MZEE IDDI IWI[ASI. Mzee Iddi went to ctsk the appellant why she was building the second stru- ctute wihoQt ALliiia 1 s permission and she admitted that she was wrong Her admission that she was wrong did not change the situation because the appllan went on building the second structure. Consequently Atnina went to report the r.iMter to the Chimala plot all otLon ConmittQe,. Mz.e Iddi Alinasi being one of its members. The committee visited the plot and instead of desiding the dispute on its meritj3 they voted onit and the majority decided that it should be divided between the parties. The.jok. this decision despite the fact that .t allocotio to individuals 60 x 40 f fL .ith. th.e .00mmitt's d ecisionAmina wQ report te ez4pthe Police, Mbeya Who 'dvised. her to institute civi. pocee- ing•s.lefare .ie TrinaryCourt.ChinJ.c. ' • iri hren the- appel'Jiñi tOld .he Coui't.that sh Was a ptr'trir oI-'the d 'iLtë p1t hlleSin that :he -.cid 50/b (fifty) to Jmina. being ,hali'. of. 't1xe..pux9hase price oV the plot.' he brought her hu$bani,,, the MA1GA.IOM40BAS as her, witheswhojile/goye her the rnpney that she qave '9At Curtisited .'th'eplo and, made a temporary ortler for the appellant, no,t to proed with th building construction pendin. dete.r4- notion, of the case. Thje. appei1a:t defied the Court oier.and .proeeded with the buidingof thehouse. - ., -, - ••-. I.,, .1. ,.- •-'- • .s___,,.. ••- -. Afterrevi'w.ing the whole,evicl-enc'e the court r.ej ected-the appelI ant!s defence and. observed, that the Chinala plot allocation Committee had np right 9ubd±vidiAinins plot -; -., -• P.3.. Judgenent was coneequeiitly given to Amino with costse The appellant was also orderpd to demolish the structure that she had erected in defiance of the Courtorder. As observed ealier in this judgement her appeal to the District Court Mbeya was dismissed. I have read the lower court record and had the advantage of listen- ing to the pa rties submissions during the hearing of this appeal. After considering the case as a whole I an satisfied that the lower Court were justified in giving judgerient for AMINA a/o RAMADHANI. The appeal is for the above reasons dismissed in its erIcire1y. Delivered in open court this 13th Day of November, 19806 7 .- .;:J r •. JUDGE 13th November, 1980 • : . :1: li_• e . ......, • ' Y 1 •. .1; -: iu H; :r .:. . • . ./. V-- - .: :- . :' •,,.- --.. .- • . -.; 1