19911115 TZHC Dar es Salaam

.. I . l Ill TI.ill :~~IG::I COURT OF TAFfZJ\.l•UJi. JiE.. D/J. ES SALl\.li..M (PC) CIVIL A~PE.ll.L NO., 40 - OF 1990 ·, .· versus' .. +CTJ.o:DO OlJUi.RI R;:;SPCIDENT. •· t·~ -.t~•:·· ... ·.,.},_ . 'l1llis ~i::i an. p,pp~t,l ncn,i1is-'i; tho ju~gmo.nt of the District Court of -:·,·. Mafia uhich had dismis:scc1. ru.1 appeal acainst the IG.linc.oni Priraary Court... ABUBXKA..71 Ql\IARI hnd sued ICTllOBO OMAR! in the 1'z<iiac::.r'7" Court claiming tl1.a~ tho lf'.:~·~cz ll<1C1 ovcxstoppcc1. -'i;l,.o bow1dary and oncronchccl in·to his shaaba nnc1 uprootcc-:. :.1is coconut tJ'.'ccs. It lTc1s in ovfci.cnce D:{;- ·11i:1ct-Pri-Baxy Cou.rt>>ii11at tho Rospcndont, IG.rol)O Omari l~w.l bou0 ht the shru:1:i11. :.frou1. thc~-~pollant 's brot;_1c.r, on~ Mohamocl Oi.1u;ri. In kccpiJ.\'.;' ui-th q~t.4:bl_i~qc1. )rn.,c~ic_o, tJ~o tr~,~~~.;io:a 1Jd;1-rco-1 tho Rospomlent • ,,,,' ' • ,•· ' .. ' I• • anc. ·the A1Jpollant 's. :br;tb~o:r 1-ras· ui tnes~;;d b_y "·the' Villn,-::;e Chairman ru.1cl 011.0 o'thcr moarJc:i: ?t.:..t11:c., ~1~1-2;9 >, . As .Mo4a111qd 1 $ .~.l~ba. u~-~ _. ?,(ljnccnt to tlla:'i; of the Appollm1·~ axrDngcmonts wcx,0,:_ri1~c for notice ·i;o l)c sent tc- the Appella11•i; · so tlm·;; l~c lr~.!l~d_ q_<?mo ancl ui tucss the handints ov9r o:r tho_ ~-'.£J.:uba bd,trccn his . ,..,. • .. _-!.J ~-\ .L :. "· ., • , , , . , : q ~ _.. • . . .• • ~ • • " • brother ancl ;,i;ho purchaser, the PJ;cscnt Responclcn·t,. 11:s :i.·;; ·:1c.~r ponea., the Appellro1·~ icnored tl1c···uoticos-'filfil-ThiTccl---=eo-tu.rn t.tp on -'i;l:i:r:oo previous occasions. 'E1e chairm~~?~.. subsequently dod,ck(l to proceed ~;~?. YfH,~q ui th -'li.1.10 -'GXn.nsaction in tho a1Jsenco of the Appclla;n-'i:;.,. ~ms the ve11da.:r, ~Bf}l~<l;:-~-ixi 1 showed tl1c boui1cln.ries of the sb.urnba 1w uas scl1il1[s to K:i.ro1Jo Q-,1l)J:i,. tho Rospo1].dc1r'i; 1 · in ~c ~rosonce o'.f_ -'$a yµI.age. C~mru.1 and -· .~'. •. :·,-~. ·:: ~-. 1•• ·:. :~ . : ..• •. •.· ·.,.' #' ,, • ' . • . : . ··; . , .. , •..• ,. :th~ ,o"li~l~J? i.1Ci!ll~Cl' of ~ho villa,::se,. It "\;~'i:ii~i" ~£l)~O;r ~f~oa ·.,c1;;··_eyicle~c~ ct, - ·. ··. ·.. :-... ~.: •.'. .. ·• . " .:2. (, ":)_ :.~ :; ( .: ' : .·,,, •.. ·. -~-. . .: • .:..-~. -~'] :. ;_·· :.;, :.~ -. ;, ., .__ :..."" Mohaaocl Ommi -'Gl1at the Appallro1t had planted coconu·~ trees in his s.b.. am.ba. l~?~---- ~ - : ~~ . . ,. ... ) : . . ~-~.:_•.. ~ :.. -~- '. . ~·-<:;_~-_: .-~-- ~- ·:···.-~ >:.::. . . .•. -J_. ;: . _·: ;: . •.· .. •;· duxine,· tlic -~b.rco 7en.rs -'i;hc Appollruit was allowed bJr MoD.W.ilocl Oma.:ri to culti-un:J;o tli'.....ci' ~hnLli;e,, nncl ~~. :;;~~- ..Thus \i611i~~d Or,1ai-f . ii-lfox;aec/ji.:{c ~~ ~~~ctept f'i1d - ..·. ·'··· .- . . ( ·. the· wi·fo.1.os.scs i)l'esont "at -'ifie handing over of tho shnmba that the yot.ul[s•" ct>conu·~ :-J~ocs i}crc· i:ti his sl1ai,t1xi an:& ·tffat :iio':'.1fould. find. out, fiom the· 2 ·· : Appeilmr~ u~tr-ii-c hall ovcrs-t<31)~ed, t-he-.",~tin4a,ty-i ',.fi;:"ii{ -~:i.o portioh in wlti.ch:'.' the. y-01..u1c· cooonut- :-trcdei WCX<l t-lantccl: tiiat ·,for:rfii:i -t;I~c -St,i. :)jcot: matter-·-. t>i'"-'lill.e:.. ·.; p±tcsa-11:-'ii c.7.ispttJG-c?"-bdtwaon :-bhe Appolfant a.no: th.a -~R~sr>e1-tdcnt. :. -• ,.._a, 1 .. , --~~~,::~· ..;.;,~_.. ·::~J.3-= .. :~" ,~.'~- ::..;:·:1.".:::.:~.-~: . " ~. . ·- - ..... __ ,, --' ....... 'Ew Appol_lant suocl ·~h.c Rcnponclont in tho Kilinc.loni P:rimnry . i\, . Court aJ.loc,-:I.111:,· -t.hat the Rcr.;:_:,,onclGnt hacl ovorsteppocl -;;110 1Jol..mc12xy ~ .,_ 1 t ' anc v.proo 1.iCC.L n.1s coconu · w:ecs, • • lnc Pr1,.1cJry fill . Cou.r-i;, ' 2,:cliCI' ' ~' . ,1car1115 .,_, 1.i.c1.o cviclcncc o:Z both sirlcs n1..lcct*·i;liat the portion wi tJ.1- ·0J.ic yoLm 6 coconut trees on -~he cast side bclonc;ocl to tho clcfonc;.ant, ·chc present rospon~:.cn·~, and ·0l1.c portion on tho sou.·0l1 belonged to tho Pl2i:cTci:ci, the pxezent Appcllmr~. As ·;;;.10 A1Jpcllant Wc:.i c.lissa·l;isfiecl with this c.lccision he a.ppcc:::,lecl 'lio the Dirr;;:ric•c Cot.U't., TI.10 aViJoal was also clismi--ssccl 211cl he .':-...as now appoulccl to this couxt. At the ho2.rine; of this appeal the Appellant complained that Jli. 1.c lc21'ncd Principal District Magistrate did. not allow hira to a:r:e,-uc 0 his £',),)i,cal n,ncl that ho w:ro·~e tI.1.0 juclgu1ont clisw.issinc J:cis arpcal without hcaxinc; ll.ia. .After perusing ·liho rccorcl I run satis:.:icc;_ -that this complai1ri; has 110 ri10:.·i•t at all. As ·b:.w xccorcl is short I will :rc.1,:roc1uce it vo:rbo..t:l,et "16.11089 J. So IG.i,1011y·e PDH Parties abscn·~. O:rclcr3 II02:ri11c 011 8/12/89 sum;aons to issue.. ffiG11cd FDM 16.11089 8,.12.89 J. So K:i.;:ncriya PDM Pro'tics absci1.,i; .. 0:rdcr Ilc2xil1c; 011 15. 2. 90,. Pn.rtios to su,-:i:no11 Signed PDM 8612.89 1,12,2.90 J. S., Kimonya PDr1 Parties present Court - Grom1cls of appeal read to the appellant I 1tho statoss they arc correct I am noJ,; satisfied with tho Jucle;,,1011"i; of tho lower cotut, :Rcsponclcnt: I ~mvc nothing to add to wb,a;i; uas \. ~tn:'Gcd at Pxill1D,J:'J' Cou.rtw il O F C Sie,11ccl PDM 15/2/90 O:rclor J. 8/3/90 S:i.c,necl PDM 15,. 2.90 2.2b/99 J. S. IG.n01t;"a PDM Appellant p:rose11·ii RosponclcnJc absent Orclor J ~ 24/3/90 f,5 r_;nccl PDM 22 .. 3a.90'' OJ.1 24. 3. 90 j1.1.cl5r11ent was clcdivexc<.l ru.icl the folloi?inz uorcls appenr a.t the foo·~ o:Z ·0.'..2c juclGracnts • ''Delivcr·ccl ii1 c 0L1:d, todDtf 24t..1-i March 1990 in the l)l'Cscncc of Respondent, Further ric;.,.•~ c:::plnincG. to Appellnn"i;, Si(;'llecl PDivI 24/3/90." It woulcl C:;,;_)pe2.:r- from this -~:.:n:;; the Appellant was no";; l)I'Gsci1t when • judG[i1cn-~ 1ra.s cleli verccl._ '11:U s Ji.allies with '~l1c Rcspoi1c."ccmt' :3 o::;:plnn.a:hon that jr:.c1.(,i.,1cn·~ wa.s r cad to hir,1 :)::- the mn,~j s tx ate hii:.1sc U ai.1d t:.w.t the Appcllru.1~ii uas absent n.t ·;;lw;G ,i.inc., It also tallies ui·;;:_: "i:i!1c Appcllc::,:,.-r~ta expiru1.a;;;ion -~rn:~ he lcn.:rnt oi t:10 dismissal of his c::)pcnl frora a comt clcrl~ one S:.1el1c,. 'Bu.t ·hl.1c xccord shows tlrnt tho Api)ollw.i-~ nnd the Respomlei.1"~ were pxesent in cou:;;t on 15.2..90 when ·i;hc c,:01.mds of appeal were :r:cacl 1):r •;;he couxt ancl ·:;:.~c Appcllont 01:Vlfi.I'mecl ·0::12:;; t'.:.cy were cor~c.c.·t.. The 11.ppcllC'..i.YG is rocordccl fo llav-c said that he is clissatisficd with -~he Appclla~1·i; :.:.n.c7. ru1Jrthinc; to ad.cl or elaborate upon his ;·,10;.1ox2l1du...-:1 of c.ppcru. he ouc;'lrt ·i;o ].:.,.we said. so thm::-c so thn.t the Rosponc.1.cnt c oLiJ.cl answer in l:'cp~•. As h~ u;::,□ con·iicnt with sc;:inG that he is di.s.satisficC.. iri·~lJ. Jlcl.c jucle;r.1cn-~ oi ~- the l0irc2 con:r--ii otter confu;,ri.11,G to the couxt that t'..10 c,'Iow.1ds of appcu.l as :read lT01'C correct he cn.1rno"'v now 1Jc hca.rcl to sn,;, ths:i; -~).10 loc.i.rncd Pxincipal Distric·;; lfrt,.:;;istxate clclivcrcc.l his judgment without l1carii'1.::; :um. No :i:ur·~J.10:r hcaxir,c iTc.:J neccsstll',Y bc:fo:rn jud..:;.;1cmt was clcli ve:-coc.7.. I hn:-vc carefully 0;~2;,ri.11.cc'.. J~l10 record of proccccli.1c,'S of the Pri,.~:~ Cou:d ru.1.cl I ru-n sa:tisficcl ·[;;.12.. t -;;:,.a decision of the ·:,--rro (;'c11Ucu1cn asscssoz:.s ancl ·tl11 Se:.lio:i: Primary CoLU:·~ }fue;istratc is basccl on ·i.:.w evj_tlcncc ad.f.uocd. and cc:w.111ot 1Jc :faul tcd in ai1::,·· ucy. AccordinG17 tho lcD..:r-ncd Principnl DistricJ., Iia[,is"i:irn.tc was jus·~ificcl in conf'irminc -~;:w.:t clccision anc.l disr,ti.osine; ·J:10 appeal. 'E.:.is 11ppc2.l therefore fails ru1(1. iJ.; is hc:rcby disrcd.ssccL ui·i;h costs to ·cl.1e Respondent. Dolivcxed. in clia.iibcrs e:~ Dar cs SalMJ.i1 this 15·:i1 ili.0 ' of Novcrnbax 1991 :i.n t:10 p:rcscnce of bo·,;h, pn:r:tics,.