19810102 TZHC Mwanza
- e To•i.PP ;i-'c 'ttttJM Ut PP.XOOe1 eq og. smo gr oi io; .xo ' ITtOD o -tx.ctct FIT.Tj. o 4I.J9O 0 1. Dtx' COPT 4 TTJ0TPP ef4 0. ZTL43 IWId .o?Jtp oq. () Mod 'ItTS ITLOO .0tXqStP S 'uQ14orpst.rrti .e 4 rlTedds eqt jo etoxoxe etq.0 I sSrs tOTTM dVrj -TW sq o (')Li UOT0eg So tMOTS'E A G act e1q. W0J. sawiod at q P 9...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19810102 TZHC Mwanza
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 2 January 1981
- 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
- e To•i.PP ;i-'c 'ttttJM Ut PP.XOOe1 eq og. smo gr oi io; .xo ' ITtOD o -tx.ctct FIT.Tj. o 4I.J9O 0 1. Dtx' COPT 4 TTJ0TPP ef4 0. ZTL43 IWId .o?Jtp oq. () Mod 'ItTS ITLOO .0tXqStP S 'uQ14orpst.rrti .e 4 rlTedds eqt jo etoxoxe etq.0 I sSrs tOTTM dVrj -TW sq o (')Li UOT0eg So tMOTS'E A G act e1q. W0J. sawiod at q P 9 'T'P UT -tiUJ E{ U8t Op O. os peputw wem - eq ;r 490 uOPT A O TvuOTqTppr utpq. 90 T -nOo eoupt.e poo Os tOflG • U1). Ut 'eto.zxe 0 ~ uTTO &TS tX llorP. Ut 2UtOp r,%XT 5M ttk .'MQU 1IAep etq. ';;qi uors jo .q?to.M ouqx.xeqep p -tp etr Moq pu eri qoTaTsTrg et. 'src. •peotar eq °i. ouepe pt et. ;o .it2re T49ti ot. jt SeUIM TXGLT etq. ;o 9U T J U aTj aq. trç çu pt t4.X940u tote'oouopte e& -r p -rro uq -ri toe 'eoup M3UPT. JO et4;wrd txwpun; ST $.i •9e958U1.tM ?atpntout l RpocL 4a9 A 9 jo 2utxiet qzq ut pre uedo oq. Ut peo11pp.eouepiA9 3ui/ 14 Xq •OiMTU0 o. 'UtAJ. SM °T TCr IM eas oq. T!J i O3O STq. pepn.s P UTA sH .!4u1edd. et -) £q -[I? - UTCJIE stt. QT M T J PUIR 1tCT. eti. p.pr 'e.tc e.t. pret. eu ;;e,. 8t UQ tt0tT0ep Sit ?tItS?<1*fl : 'XflP icxWWtJd et JO. P.XOO€t UtOO 9tfl UtI0d) Gtfl JO pU?TetUOth'Lp?tO 0J 0Ue 'T PT UTTd Olfl. '1.fl- 'TIQTS A:.eWs et. ,ze..J? .uo toT.?e ptx• otti TO ~ Jle cMO stoo ;, ..setpunOq et O. s • et eq.J etio 'p.Feq. pu utO uetj. o •x' e pOW.X81. eto8d tu2.pe1.oeTToo fo4oedtit t0tt1.tM P1 < U140Oth3T2T ,.I5JT .uoienb ut 'o - t'r o 'prp nto $Ottt(] O. TM I03 1.QTJT UeP1D5G.x S rn3 O pio5d' p0JdUtL we 1.tfl9 5TtWtD RTEflOWTUUU .XttCO 'IIJt.Id8ttLL U %t pepuno;un Ww[o et purio 'n- 't''i tXot ij.tqXy eT O UtUTdU)OO p OOfl$tifltO.J..'ptp •U peTT.0voJous 'U 'pu jo std etoedse pees Ptfl. seitpun'q eTTI. pO.I1.ep XQ PoP.Ith P9tt 'TrWrT TU?CO 1..ZTL00 STT.tOT1 M 1.UT1T6ddP eIT. £.zwtzg xeq ii ' prJ 'e t.cnt5?riy otoxe q.uepixodse.z 9T[3 • • ••• •• ': '•• 'ét.IpUflO OLf (;;twti t2ttt 9 t.1O) JTOToITW • • •: • JDA (vxpueJa TrUtL.tQ) • a' ! • ! • a 0• • •. • Hyrrrrr1dv.. 'a • • - .' S .rI1-ytrr1z - • t ,JflO IUFtcT Sjej4q.j pu - ( 9L6T JO 99 A) • .totiie1 !bs tunM • •j ezoecr - LL6t ;° ccOrOINT - t 9 dd tto OT.t 0 na ;o nio T(t euq Jo •txoistoep aq. woxd) • 62,61 tw Z 6 IT rI 7,-, rv 'ilAID (3d) P • • • ir.oicrnrnr (jxtt5e}I ot.xqt(r otfl. ul) • - 7 vINvzIwIIJ Io LIflOO T-TDIH RHLTJ NI • I " Obvloubly the Di'brict Ccrt, did not in this oso d.ieot th e Prirnry Court to do 'the job, assuii4, o odüTh it was minded nd had. .: reason to take additional evic1nce as tken 3u4t does appear openJ.y th a t bj the Th.301Ob (ourt, out a8suming i h i s was in the minds of the said court ad4itiorE1 eviciiTäJfl contrary to thu. rquizezent of tii 1AwaboVe, no rabon _ r€ ,00ru a&, to ±ij t' aid court tobk u&i ani iitiative. ta tL. ction aly s k a for iise1f, whethir -t vtno i. ta1en oy ti'e Primar' Ccrt, or, for reasons reoorded, by the .Lhs1ct Court, 'uh iaic is not ind- e nd ntj out adaitional to -, the eviUnc. 14tiy, xid i ly reord by th Pr1rnrd Cort, o that, it is the totality of adi±ionalevidehc .n.i thc oidenoe iri.tially recorded, that akould be oonsicoreu aid e the fotnuation of tile cecision reached Bt.ir tL c tu. Ditict Court, baed it Jcciion by totail-y relying on additional evidende ioh io In my view imprper, as the said oôurt deacendended into an arear if rrigiilal jurisdiotion, which was not its province at that .ge. Beae no reans why the Diatrict Gourt took the eiJ.enoe itself ppea.r .ar the record, and bouiS it %hocalled a4ditiona, evidence that, formed the basis of tie ciioh and since the ao called, additional evideaoe has a problems of weight, s.c th same was gien a o, public speakers at pu.olic ralies, I an here and now tak.t t libertj, to ignore the same, The question now Ia wnether, the evicioioa adduced by the Primal7 Court, did estaslish the resp icicnt's claim, tnat, tn &pllant uprooted or, dstroed the boundres and encroathd upon his land. having revi81tet the eVid10 I am satafu 1s waE ti e rii.rj Cor't, and mused as the Lrbmtraioh tribunal 1ad erlicr tound, that th rcsponcent eviaence was undeclaive id he,tant, He ooçld. not i.n snow eviancs of uprooted boundtxies er siow tkia lao3, rier tne 3oLindar1es had oeen uprooted from. In the oirouistanoes the Primai Court w rii1t to hola that, the respo&nt did not prome, th... 11 c; ,_ a t i o ns and I so do1 In tie Lflt, I hero ~ ., set aside &e Diatrict bo4rtlq juajnent, nd remnDt.te the Prinury Ccrt' The appeal is alloe.d witk oos MANZJ hIGH COtflT E. KATITI 1..: 2ND JniJRY, 1981. , DG e . .•'_,- p-a. . ,.. . ..., ... 4. ...........................1. ..........