MISC LAND APPEAL NO 45 OF 2023 OBED SULUBE VS KIMAGA NTAVUMU AND ANATHER

IN T H E HIG H CO U R T O F TH E UN IT ED R EPU B LIC O F TA N ZA N IA (K IG O M A S U B -R EG IS T R Y ) A T K IG O M A M ISC ELLA N EO U S LA N D APPEA L NO . 4 5 O F 2023 O BED SU LUBE A PPELLA N T VERSUS K IM W A G A NTA V U M U 1 sr R E S P O N D E N T FA BIAN O NT A V U M U 2ND RESPOND EN T (Appeal from the Ruling and drawn order of the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Kasulu at Kasulu) (M. E. Sekabila, Chairman) Dated 7th day of February 2023 In (Land Application No. 88 of 2022) JU D G M EN T Date: 11/07/ & 16/08/2024 NKWABI, J.: The appellant filed a land application in the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Kasulu. The land matter had been entertained by ward tribunal for Murufiti where an attempt to reconcile or mediate the parties to this appeal proved futile because the respondents in this appeal did not enter appearance. In the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Kasulu district, the appellant's land application encountered a preliminary objection to the 1 effe ct that the ap p licatio n w as in co m p etent o n acco u nt of vio lating the provisio n s of regu latio n 3(2 ) of the Lan d D isp ute s C o u rt s (T he D istrict Lan d an d H o usin g T ribu na l) R egu latio n, 20 0 3 G .N . N o . 17 4 of 200 3 . In su b m issio n in ch ie f the re in , the cou n se l fo r the re spon de nts su b m itt ed w h ile citin g the ru le to the effect th at: Reg u latio n 3(2 ) provid e s that, "A n ap p licatio n to the tribu na l sha ll be made in the form pre scrib ed in the second sche du le to the se R eg u latio ns and sha ll co ntain : (a ) The names and address of the parties; (b) The address of the suit premises or location of the land involved in the dispute to which the application relates; ( c) Nature of disputes and cause of action: ( d) Estimated value of the subject matter of the dispute; ( e) Reliefsought; (f) Amount of ret if the dispute involves payment of rent H The applicant, in the trial tribunal, pressed that the application was lodged in accordance with the law, thus, he asked the trial tribunal to overrule the preliminary objection. After hearing the preliminary objection by way 2 o f w ritt e n s u b m iss io n s , the le a rn e d C h a irm a n su s ta in e d th e p re lim ina ry o b je c tio n a nd stru ck o u t th e land a p p lic a tio n w ith c o s ts . T h e re a s o n fo r th e strik in g o u t o f th e land a pp lic a tio n w a s a rtic u la ted b y th e ch a irm a n tha t th e a pp lic an t ind ic a ted p ro v is io n s o f th e la w in th e a pp lica tio n w h ile m a k in g re fe re n c e to th e m e d ia tio n tha t w a s co n d u c ted in th e w a rd trib una l, a nd s a id th a t w as imp rop e r a t la w b e ca u s e th e a pp lic a tio n o u g h t to h a ve d ra w n in the m a n n e r p res c ribe d in th e fo rm . O ffe n d e d b y th e ru lin g, the a p p e llan t p re fe rred th is a p p e a l in w h ic h h e line d u p fou r g rou n d s o f a p pe a l w h ic h c an b e c on v e n ie n tly su mm a riz ed th u s : l. That, the learned chairman grossly erred in law and in fact to reason that the application did not meet the requirement of the law without carefully examining the same. 2. That the learned chairman grossly erred in law and fact for sustaining the preliminary objection which was illegal, while the appellant had followed the regulations in total. The appellant prayed that: 1. The appeal be allowed with costs. 3 11. The decision of the district land and housing tribunal for Kasulu be quashed and set aside. 111. Any other relief that this honourable Court may find just to grant to the appellant. This appeal was heard by way of oral submissions. Only the appellant appeared in person, unrepresented. The respondents did not appear. The Appellant did not expound his grounds of appeal during the hearing. He merely stated that he was not satisfied by the decision of the trial tribunal and that he has come to this Court to get justice. He then beseeched this Court for justice as he is the administrator of the estate of his late father. If anything, the submission of the appellant in this appeal complicates his position the more if he is just trying to protect the estate of his late father in the land application he filed in the trial tribunal the subject of this appeal, then he has no locus standi to sue in his personal capacity as he did. Be that as it may, back to the crux of the matter in this appeal. I have examined the filed document that was intended as a land application and see a number of defects: 4 1 . It appeared as if it were a petition of appeal against the mediation by the ward tribunal. 2. The addresses of the parties were not indicated. 3. The appellant did not indicate the cause of action. 4. The appellant did not indicate when the cause of action arose. 5. The appellant did not describe the piece of land or indicate the location of the piece of land the subject of the land application. 6. The appellant did not indicate the estimated value of the disputed piece of land. 7. One of the reliefs claimed was the decision in mediation be enforced. With the above anomalies in the land application, I do not see how I can fault the decision of the trial tribunal that the land application was incompetent. To put it into other words, I cannot say that the appellant complied with the mandatory requirements of the regulation. I hold that the land application was incompetent, it deserved to be struck out as the trial tribunal did. Since the respondents incurred costs, the trial tribunal was justified to order for costs. I should be noted here that the outcome of an incompetent case or application was clearly stated in MIC Tanzania 5 Ltd v . M in is te r fo r La b our a n d Y ou th D e v e lo p m e n t & Another, Civil Appeal No. 103/2004, (CAT), where it was underscored that: The nothingness of incompetent proceedings was underscored by this Court in the case LEONSI SILA YO NGALAI V HON. JUSTINE ALFRED SALAKAMA AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, CIVIL APPEAL NO 38 OF 1996 (unreported) This court said: . . . The second aspect is whether this Court may adjourn an appeal which is incompetent, in order to allow the appellant to take necessary steps to cure the incompetency. This court has said it before that an incompetent appeal amounts to no appeal. It follows therefore that the court cannot adjourn what it does not have. Under such circumstances, what the court does is to strike the purported appeal off the register (emphasis is ours). So as there was no application before the High Court, according to the ruling of the learned judge, it was an exercise in futility to purport to determine it on the merits. 6 No valtd and enforceable orders could be made 1n application which was not before the High Court Consequently, I dismiss the appeal because it is unmerited. I make no order as to costs because the respondents have not entered appearance. It is so ordered. DATED at KIGOMA this 16th day of August, 2024. J. F. NKWABI JUDGE 7