19821009 TZHC Mwanza

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA liT MWANZA (PC) JiATRIMONIAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7 OF 1982 ' (From thP. d"'cision of the District Court Ngara No, 3/1981) THFBFZA KINYAMA ZINGE' • ••••••••••••••••• •·• ......... •.... JIPPELL.ANT v e r s u s ZACHABI.A JOSEPH •••••••••• ; •••• , • • .................... • •. RESPONDENT SUBJFCT: Dissolution of marriage·• and _distribution of assPts, JUDG:'I\ENT KATITI 1 J. The rBspond":'nt Zacharia Jos€ph, successfully · ~ough't-,an-d. 1 ,ob,tained a dissolution of his .narl'iag~, w_ith the appellant Theraza Kinya.naiinge before Ngara District Court. It had been a marriage that was optLnistically celebrated in 1,55, with vows, to livr-:, happily to the exclusion of othors. Th"' ,narriagP. though bless:id 1vi th seven ,children', nevP.r staynd it's course. PunctuatP.d with quarrels,, assaults, truancy, nocturnal errands facilitated by exist and entriAs through windows, infliction .of gonorrhoea by th." wif P. failure to cook, and nurse the husband when sick all by TherP.za by the. appi:illant, th·• :narriag~ was found to hav"! irrftpr:rably brokAn down, and hP.nc<: its dissolution, by 1.ho?. District Court. I agrP.~, -·•·· 1 ,-,${ ' ·,··· •• 'that a marriag~ so seriously suff eririi from such ills has irr·eperlthly • brok'3n down.• Af\ 0 r ordPring that thP. ,narriage "b~ dissolved, and condf!;nning e:::1ch party to b"'ar, his/her o-wn costs, th" trial court,, cc.,TIP 'up with a procedur~ at b0.st i~provisP.d 1 an~ in th~ folloving roannPr 1 and I ~~J)'roduc~ t~~ sam0.:- Proper ty: PA ti tiono.r: 1rfa havP 3 h('>a<is of cat-\lf!, two acrt>a of banana plantati9n valued at Sbs.(,000/=•· ii rE'sidPnc':! house at Naka~unga val~@d ~t Shs.15,000/=! R$ ~_:pond en t: We havP. 15 hf!c:hs of cattle, we h,1vr. 2 acres ;Of banana tret F, and onP- housq at Nakatunga. c. A~ Sllilogilo Soni~r - · 1~gistr::-.tc 20th Octob"lr 1 1981. OrdAr: Hearing to continu-1 c{ . 23/10/1981, Sgd.: \ c. 1"1._ lh:iJ.~gllc S<1·nior •111gist1ato . 2~th OctfbPr, i9~. '' I' ·r· '.1. '- -. . (PC):~_,\i&ti; • C. llpp. 7/82. ,.· ~-.'f· 23rd. OctobP;, 1981 ;; Court-as bPfore '. ;;,,' _:\;\' . A Paiti~s.,P,fJ1~E?J.t,. '-j: I p· ,::: ·-~,·,l:•1 TI .1 j,tvl'.c 1 T~ ~9,0~r't'TWi'lbnow divide the proi,Pt-ty)_'jo{rit1Y 'l6rfd:i'."re:d;. Th~r have ar1.,! -,~r<;rn~r .l~v,~.s~~sa.~io~·. ~,,, .ho~~(J~·,1'~1,ed at Shs.15.000/.. , about 8 n~·ads · of cattfo ,Value.d ,a:t Shs.,8, 000/.. , a banc::na shamba valued at Shs. 4,qo'0,/. . , ·~· ·••aal'Gf; l~be' prQpetty joil"l"t:t1 ,' &oqt,ired is She. 27 t oool-=, and. theziefo_r_e _. sihce • the pe ti ti oner, has also duties of :naintaintaining the 'Childr~n, will give his wife property worth Shs.10 1 000/-.~ ·or cash tiquivalent to thnt 1 value. Bight of aPi)eal explained. Sgd: d ~~:~ Chilogila ·. .{·. :,· 1, fi : 1· • Senior • iiiagi stra te. ;Je\. 1,,i·r.<• ----~ '' ·;;•1 23rd 0ctob1!r, 1981. ':! (; ct•,: ~ :l (; ! ,:. ,..J I ,:-. ,-.., f - I, l I.(\, • ·" \\:;.::: • .·;: ·,· :·r:u ·), \ 'The ~pp-ellant1:hhs appeal~d,Jandt ffi.r:-respond,mt has cross . ' ·. -.· .' :·i ·f • .· • I appealed~:: · Co-incidentally none of~ ~~f.!m is challi:lnging the ' , ~ I ; ' ' 'dissolution of ;narriae~. ThP. app~llant is contending thet, tha . ' I prope~ty_that,includ~s, 15 heads of cattle, a house an~ 2 sha;nba that ar/ ~og,=rthi:ir 'v!O;~h Sha. 76, 000/... , th'! Shs,lOtOOO/=, awardfld as her property share;, was unfairly s,nall. Arguing th'.! cross- ap~P.al♦ ~r. Buta;nbala app~aring for th~ c~oss-appellant submitt~d with lucidity, that ;natched thougl.i that 1 there was no finding at all, that t_he property in qu"!stion was jointly acquirnd, a condition pr~c ,.: . dont. 0 Before ' ., I co,ne to the subst,rnce of the appPal, I h::ivo first to deal with a procr-JdUJ:'al .question, pertaining to tLnc-: li1ii tation J of the filing _of thr-, cross-:-objection, an c1spect• that ,Jr. { Butambala, copiously conceded was over~look1d by his,cli0n~- The provi~ions of .Rulo 22(1) ORDER 31 apply to a cross-appqal. Bule 22(1) -of ORDER Jl ~ · .!)rovides as foilowst- 22 - (1) Any r-r~spondent~ though be .nay not hav"' app1:1aled fro;n any part of th~ dl:3 ere~, ,nay not only supper t the dr-1 cree c£1 any of thEJ grounds d~ cid,=;d against him, in ii.h!" ~urt bAlow, ·but take my cross-objP.ction to tho d-JcrP.1~,' which h~ could hc:1ve td-:~n by way of app~al, i~pvided h~ has tilAd such obj~ctipn in the court, ':4ithin on" ,no:oth, fr0.n thr. d2t,~ of-~rvicP. on hi.n 1 or ~lis · adv~cat<1 of notiM of th-; day f' ixP.d for hnaring of, the appeal, or within such ful't~r t~.ne, D.s th~ court may saa it fit to allow. • I . ThP. wording of t'he- abovn._ su. \-rul"! 22(1) :provide_s for tlD:··,11 conditions for fi1ifyg. " of crot~obj'!!ctions, and in ,ny vi-~w, th"!y ar11 :- (i) It sn-;;na c1~6l', that cross-obj11cti,ons under th~ , ' said ~ule, 1 cU'l only b"! fi.l<Jd by th<, p,.1 ty who night 1 hav~: 2.:ppc:>a;tP.t·fr~11 tho d41Crf!"' of th(• Court bP.low, but dic1 1t\·o•tu1lly not ap~al. ' (ii) Thr-i. rulo aJ,Psdf\5°s, th 0 p"'riod. 9f lL1itation - (PC). ,'1atr.• c.App~ 7/82. 3 th-- t cross obJA ct ions, should bP. filed by the respondent within on'.3 :non th, fro;n the. d~.t(~ of service of notic'.'! of the day fixed for hearing thn appAal .• (iii) And tlv::t the time may be extend~d upon sLtffici1mt caus€ b1ing shown to the cour.t, is inevi t. bly implied by the-: sub-rul'7 wording - or within such furthi?r time:, as th~ __ c_ourt may SI'!'" it fit to allowl The record speaking and so loudly, shows how ssriously time barred thi, cross-obj -ctions, filed ov!'lr aftP.r on1; and he.lf - :nonths aftar thP notice ar1:1. Nor did we havP., application to 0xtcmd timP. On thos"l grounds alone I would hast1rn to dis.niss th11 S2JlJ 1 and I so do. Coming back, to th~ app~llant' s complaint about thG inadquacy of the sharp of prop,-.rty, I find thP base on which tl.v; trial. 11agistrate founded his award WGt'rying,.. In the. first ·placP., assu11i11g such prop.arty dx,istE!d, no where on rCTcord is it evid1mtially shown, th,:t 'sue~.' proper-tty, or as's~ts wcra acquir~d by thP.m during th1:1 m2rriage, through their joint ~fforts. Th,, tPach'-1J' and. pupil qu"!stions 2nd anawells, that th.a tr.ial .nagistrE!t~ and partiP.s a;xciead·, in, dtd a lot to L-nport confusion, rnther than olarity. And even rno1';1 so, nowhere do the said answers show, thc:1t the assits wero jointly acquired, during ;narriage.. i\ssistance fro,n sect:~on 114 of th~ ::12:criat:,e Act, 1971, w:tp.ch the trial m':lgistre.te .nust ha·Je' re..'iorted to, clearly shows, that, thG rnatri~onial ass~ts that arP. to 'b~ itvided b~twGcn.th~ portiP.s, must be property acquirad through Joint ~ fforts, during m~.rriage, or acquired by one party before marriage~ but substantially improved during ,narriage by the otb.@rrT)arty, or. b r thAir joint '(,ffor'ts. This me€jils 1 there must b'-l -:ividen~.q as to ftli~ (fintrib.u:bon towards the . . I acquisition or improvc,n-mt of th@ ~re per· r, duril'l& marriagq by the party chai;ning a share from auch/prorirty. Ill this c2sP, we have no such ~videncc. ]'urther, such p1 oporty ;oust bA .such fis i's iri•mtifi-:ld. 1 In this caso~ WEI cannot 'l:::sily t2ll as to wr.ich p..r~opP.rty, nor thn quantum ' . t . of thP. s.,mc:i - for instF.:nce, whilf, ·:~ rP spond,mt said hr had three hr.ads of ca ttll?., th0 appallant said,· tjiey· had fi:ftorn hoods, and ' t' yet without substantial avidencl!l . the t~I i.al . coll!'t came out with figure of A i~ht heads of cattle r withou f even qhowing how hP cane by such a figure. 1;nd thPn P.V~ll 11ore s ~ 'Prising, wts -th:1 ~pp-e'·l.ll;~! s unsolicitPd disclosuN1t when pr<1secutin, .1 th~ appeal ,th2,tt sh"' contributed S4s. 2,000/,.. towarct's the con //ructirm of th,, house, and 'Shs.2oof=, wo11ards th:; acquisiti.,on of titf banana sha,11ba 1 - and this by cf person 'wh~, swears th;:,_t Shs.io,090/Li. awardAd was i11udqu~te.· • 1 • ' . 4 It does si:i-9:n to m11, that thllr~ was, scanty, if no <ividnnc:i, to .. bas'l a propPr dP. cision on ass<'1 t distribution.,., if circu,nstancP. s l d P. ;nand it. I therefor,:, order that thP ca,s" fil 0 b(: s·,.nt back, so that, thP district ;112:;istrat"' ;nay initiat"' p:roc 0 ss fo hc:v~ thP pertif'S addUCf! P.~id~nc~ in rflspe.ct of their Cl-:3ios, c:nc1 if any property of any, b~ accordingly divided. Each party to bear his costs. DPlivered this 9th day of ccioter, 1982. Lu~~,~-- F. -~-\...A_. W; ·· KirTITI \. JUDGE • r ., •