mohamed hamis hamduni vs ally shabani kilima 4 others 2022 tzhclandd 12725 30 november 2022

mohamed hamis hamduni vs ally shabani kilima 4 others 2022 tzhclandd 12725 30 november 2022

The applicant has no lawful interest in the attached property as he purchased it from a person (3rd respondent) who was declared a trespasser and had no title to pass; therefore, the property is liable for attachment and execution in favour of the 1st and 2nd respondents.

Citation
mohamed hamis hamduni vs ally shabani kilima 4 others 2022 tzhclandd 12725 30 november 2022
Parties
Applicant/objector: Mohamed Hamis Hamduni; 1st Respondent/decree Holder: Allyshabani Kilima; 2nd Respondent/decree Holder: Yacoub Mohamed Kidula; 3rd Respondent/judgment Debtor: Joseph Sabaya Secheme; 4th Respondent: Alex Joseph; 5th Respondent: Foster and Company Limited
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
30 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Case Application / Ruling on Objection Proceedings
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Execution of Decree, Objection Proceedings, Ownership of Land, Attachment of Property
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Execution of Decree Objection Proceedings Ownership of Land Attachment of Property

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohamed Hamis Hamduni

Applicant/objector

Allyshabani Kilima

1st Respondent/decree Holder

Yacoub Mohamed Kidula

2nd Respondent/decree Holder

Joseph Sabaya Secheme

3rd Respondent/judgment Debtor

Alex Joseph

4th Respondent

Foster and Company Limited

5th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Case Application / Ruling on Objection Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the property attached is liable for execution
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a lawful interest over the attached property

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant has no lawful interest in the attached property as he purchased it from a person (3rd respondent) who was declared a trespasser and had no title to pass; therefore, the property is liable for attachment and execution in favour of the 1st and 2nd respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Applicant to pay costs to the 1st and 2nd respondents