19900126 TZHC Dar es Salaam
The grant is revoked because the respondent concealed prior proceedings and the proper jurisdiction is Zanzibar, not Dar es Salaam.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19900126 TZHC Dar es Salaam
- Parties
- Applicant: David Isaka Luninze; Respondent: Unnamed Respondent (administrator of Jean Chomwaj's estate)
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 26 January 1990
- Procedural Posture
- Probate and Administration Cause / Ruling on Application for Revocation of Grant of Letters of Administration
- Outcome
- Application granted; grant of letters of administration to respondent revoked.
- Legal Topics
- Revocation of Grant, Jurisdiction, Concealment of Material Facts
- 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.
Parties
David Isaka Luninze
Applicant
Unnamed Respondent (administrator of Jean Chomwaj's estate)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Probate and Administration Cause / Ruling on Application for Revocation of Grant of Letters of Administration
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the grant of letters of administration to the respondent should be revoked
- 2 Whether the respondent concealed material information from the court
- 3 Whether the proper jurisdiction for the estate is Zanzibar
Ratio Decidendi
The grant is revoked because the respondent concealed prior proceedings and the proper jurisdiction is Zanzibar, not Dar es Salaam.
Court Disposition
Application granted; grant of letters of administration to respondent revoked.
Orders
- Grant of letters of administration to respondent revoked.
- Estate administration to be adjudicated by appropriate court in Zanzibar.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
... IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM PROBATE AND ADMINISTRATION CAUSE NO. 64 OF 1988 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE JEAN CHOMWAl AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION BY DAVID ISAKA LUNINZE. RULING Th'is is an applicatj on for revocath1n of a grar,t of letters of. administration filed under sectjor 49 (1)(b) of the probate and Administratior ordina'."lce cap. 445. prior to the grant in question, appUcar,t and respor,dert each f~ led separate pr,1bate cause fr, Ilala primary court ,... ; . and·Magomeni primary court, respectively, for the admjristrati0n of the estate of the deceased or,e Jea"' .chimwaj. Each of them was graPted letters .----,_ of administratior. BUt appljcart challe"'ged the legality 0f the respondert•s gra-t he'"ce appealed·t.J the d·'str:ict cot.rt. por reasor,s contairied j r its judgme-t, the d :i_str:i ct c,,urt •-:-'ull if ied both gra,..ts. The court made a fl ... d:i_ .. g; i.-ter alja; that at the t5me of his death, deceased wal domiciled ir za,.zibar a"'d so the matter falls·~,.,der the jurisdictio"' of za..:.z:l bar ..court:s. The partj es were accordi;.;gly advised to file probate pr.)Ceedjrgs .i ... the appropdate court i,.., za. . zih~;~ Heedful to thfa advice, applica-t, fHed pr::,bate cause No.~5: of 1988 ir the Hi?Jh court i,.., za.-zjbar. The matte·r is still pe"'di$-\g. :. 0'"' ·the other harid ir, defia"'ce. ·to the dj strkt court, s adyice, respo,.,de"'t: dee idea to fj le probate cause No. 64 of · 1988 .. ir this court. He was accordingly gra,..tea letters··of admj ... ist:ratio"' ·o,., 15th N0veh\ber,· 1988. Ir tfiis applicatjot-:, the app~ica,..t is fjrayi ... g for··the rev,)catfo.., of tfie said .. gra'"'t 0"' twt:> grou,..ds. '.·~ £ . First applica.--t is argui ... g that the respo ... de-t did ... ot reveal!,., hi~ ~ poi;!ttio,., t'Form 26) that there had bee"' p·revj ous court: proceedi,..gs i,., co,.,rectio"' ..with the··deceased estate thereby co"'ceali ... g from the court some material i"'formati o.... A"'d sec,J"'dly, as .. ru.led by the appel'late district court, the pr__.,per f\Jrum for adjudicatiu,... of this matter i"' za,.,zibar. witti respect;· b0th argume ... ts are··s,>.Ud. u,...der paragraph 9 of probate a"'d Admi,..ist:ratio,..,, Form 21,"respo-de"'t was specificatly required to reveal whether cir ,...ct t:here had bee" prev1':)Us pr,>ceedjt-:gs co---cer,...ir,g this estate. Respol"de,..,t I s"co,...cealme~t of this i ... f0rmat::i <.>"' re;\.ders the"gra,...t··rev0<:able~ under sectio" ~9 (1)(b) of the probate apd Admi"jstratio~ ordi,.,a~ce. - ••••,r;,••/2 •• ~o• - 2 The secO"l"d grou~d ls.equally sustai~able. There had bee~ ,.,o ~&al .aga:i-st the district court 1 s fi-dj"'g that at' tf'ie time of his deatll deceased was domicilea i~ za ... zibar • . This fj.-di-g;· prfma facie, vests exclusiv-e jurisdictio... 0"" this estate t.:) courts i-- za ...ztbar.- It is evident•·that had this court. bee~ i-formed of the exi~te .. ce of this.'fi .. cU .. g, :it' w.-.,uld -,)t have na,..dled t'his matter the way it did. I,... co.-elusio- th:i s··appl.ic'~io ... is gra-t'ed~· The gra ... t ot _letters of .. admi,..istratfr, ... g5ve ... to the respo-de ... t··by wh~s eourt ·ia revoked; a .. d it i• ordered that the admj-5stratio .. ~f tne de=ea$ed estate ~hould "I:;e adjudjcated by appropr:i ate ~ourt 5 .. aa .. eibaJ:t. APpliea-t is e-ti.tl..ed to hJs co.st.," H. A. MSUMI .. JUDGE 26th Ja,..uary, 1990. I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL 0 SENIOR DEPUTY REGISTRAR