fatuma ally vs aboud salim al amry 1996 tzhc 25 18 march 1996

fatuma ally vs aboud salim al amry 1996 tzhc 25 18 march 1996

The appellate tribunal correctly found that the trial tribunal's rent assessment was speculative and not based on a valuation survey, and that the proper procedure for reassessment was not followed. The appellate tribunal was justified in maintaining the 1988 rent until proper reassessment. The appellant, having benefited from the renovations, is liable to refund the respondent the cost of renovations, even if express consent was not given.

Citation
fatuma ally vs aboud salim al amry 1996 tzhc 25 18 march 1996
Parties
Appellant: Fatuma Ally; Respondent: Aboud Salim Amry
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
18 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Misc Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Housing Appeals Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Rent Assessment, Standard Rent Determination, Renovations and Repairs, Appeals Process
Source Language
English
Landlord and Tenant Civil Procedure Rent Assessment Standard Rent Determination Renovations and Repairs Appeals Process

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fatuma Ally

Appellant

Aboud Salim Amry

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Misc Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Housing Appeals Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellate tribunal erred in reducing the rent fixed by the trial tribunal
  2. 2 Whether the appellate tribunal was biased or misdirected in its findings
  3. 3 Whether the appellant consented to renovations and is liable to refund costs

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate tribunal correctly found that the trial tribunal's rent assessment was speculative and not based on a valuation survey, and that the proper procedure for reassessment was not followed. The appellate tribunal was justified in maintaining the 1988 rent until proper reassessment. The appellant, having benefited from the renovations, is liable to refund the respondent the cost of renovations, even if express consent was not given.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Judgment of appellate tribunal upheld
  • Appellant to refund Shs. 120,540 to respondent