evarin andreas vs hamad ramadhan kisome 2019 tzhclandd 24 16 september 2019

evarin andreas vs hamad ramadhan kisome 2019 tzhclandd 24 16 september 2019

The appellate tribunal's decision was not supported by the evidence on record, as the respondent's account of how his father acquired the land was inconsistent and unsubstantiated. The tribunals failed to clearly define the land in dispute and misdirected themselves as to the real issue. The proceedings and judgments of both tribunals are quashed and the matter is to be tried de novo after the respondent obtains letters of administration.

Citation
evarin andreas vs hamad ramadhan kisome 2019 tzhclandd 24 16 september 2019
Parties
Appellant: Evarini Andreas; Respondent: Hamadi Ramadhan Kisome
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
16 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Land Appeal / Second Appeal Before High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; proceedings and judgments of both tribunals quashed; retrial ordered.
Legal Topics
Land Ownership, Inheritance, Spousal Property Rights, Tribunal Procedure, Retrial
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Land Ownership Inheritance Spousal Property Rights Tribunal Procedure Retrial

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evarini Andreas

Appellant

Hamadi Ramadhan Kisome

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Land Appeal / Second Appeal Before High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lower tribunals properly evaluated the evidence regarding ownership of the disputed land
  2. 2 Whether the respondent had legal standing to claim the land without letters of administration
  3. 3 Whether the issue in dispute was properly defined by the tribunals

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate tribunal's decision was not supported by the evidence on record, as the respondent's account of how his father acquired the land was inconsistent and unsubstantiated. The tribunals failed to clearly define the land in dispute and misdirected themselves as to the real issue. The proceedings and judgments of both tribunals are quashed and the matter is to be tried de novo after the respondent obtains letters of administration.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; proceedings and judgments of both tribunals quashed; retrial ordered.

Orders

  • Proceedings and judgments of Ward Tribunal and District Land and Housing Tribunal quashed and set aside.
  • Matter to be tried de novo.