19951110 TZHC Dar es Salaam

. ii Ill Tilln HIGII OO1.fil.T OF T1JIZlJfL\ CIVIL liPPEtili 1m. 22 OF 1995 W,") f,1\'lt.r11/ITTTV, T t. , fl t,-0-r:ff • .~ 1\lTTl J!J.\.UJ.~l\. ~:iu.,u~ o O o • e • 0' • • ·o 9 • O .0 o o o o o -0 co O • •JJ,.t-J:" J.:J.UJ,..l,UJ.·U. VT['J3US Ee ]l. lJ.tJGJT,T:le • • • • • • • o o·•·li • • • • o •.., o" • o • o o ollilm'011J)EJ_ifT Frallk !dud.ala the ~pollant ;iJ.1 this □n.ttcr has raised sono six gi_"Ound.s of appeal against the decision of IIoUsil'l(s 1:.ppcals Tribunal d.c.1.tcd 11.4.95. For oasG of roforcmco I shall stutc tl1er.1 horeundors ... that the trial vice - oJ.1n,:i.J.nnn of the llousing .t\:)poal Tribunal erred in law in procoocling to dotcrr.line the appeal after boine ·satisfied that the trfol Vioo-chaimw. Regional Tious:ing Tribunal did not rcoo1~d the proceedings ].)r0J?orly and. in other . incidence ho reoo:rclcd other things that what was stated °b"J the speakers in tho svit. - that the a.weal vice-ohaj,.-uan grossly nisd.ixectcd biosolf in la.w in oondcrm.ine ~ho appellant to bo oV'i.cted fioon tho suit prcnises for foil'ltt'o to ].)2-Y hous·e rent when it is on rooord that the ~pellant ar>:Plicd to pay rant e,t t::iat t!1e rrppecl v:i.ce-ol1r.u-nnn grossly ru.sdirooted hinseif in lmr in · cond.enninc tho i:q:ipcllnnt to be evicted fron the suit prom.sos for f a.i.h1ro to D~ house ront wbon it is on rcoord that tho aJ;l)?cllant a1>11 lied to pay rent at

the Reg.i.onaJ. IIous:ing Tribunol 'but the t:cilJUlWl refused to a.ccapt tbi~_.preyer ., - that tho vico-clUlil.uon . of tho tribunal Q.Toct in law inC basin,:,- his decision in the now evidence thn.t was not ad.ducod d~:ing U the hearing at the lle{$ional Rousing Tribunal. - that tho vice-ch~un erred in law in holdin8, that there was no issu.c raisod a.t iihe Regional Ilousing Tribunal which required the Tribunal to intervene and di:roct tho landlady to. forwa:rd application for assossnont of Stanaard rent before >a.:i.sing ront and tow.ro:'t1s end of his judgnont directed tho landlady to lodge tho sane. ••••/2- - 2 ,:_ ~ that- the trial __ vioe-clUJi..rraan .and -bb.e_. app€-U vi-ce cha.innan erred grossly in not considering the isS'lle of landlady duty to effect repairs of the suit hcuse that the appeal vice chairman e1".l:ed in ho~!_.d.i...-v:tg that since the wife of the appellMt is the one Nho Gic;r1ed the original tenecy agreement ond in case of ln.•e;;i.ch of tha.t tenancy agreement the husband has no locus sta.nd.i Indeterming this appeal I will first deal. w:.th this last ground., The cl!)J)ellant in this case is the husband of one ELIZA MiIJALio .:t :i..s not in dispute that it is this Eliza who first identified the g·u.:J.t premises and entered into tenancy agreement with the reGpr.·-·10.0nt in .J GJ'_;_·v.a::-;? 198~ In ·1989 Eliza was joined by the appellant

after t.~1eir mnx·:riage I have not been the tenency agreement as signed by Eliza but I ru.:' ;-10:i.:-sllil.(fod by ·the a.ssei--t ion mn.de the respondent that the appellant F:v2::i.'k is not her legal ten.:mt - rather it is Eliza the ar.,J)ellant I s wi:i'.eG TJ.1.:) l.._:i;1,; of .·furriagc Act •~ 556 af'f ords married women capacity to ente~:- into ~101':.t:·"-v::tun.l 0"1Jl::lga:tion notwithstandinc \ . their marital status~ The seci;ion :re::dss-, s.56 A married 1-roman shall hav ~ -th& sai-nc :;.:-ic;ht as has a 11 men to acquire:\, hold '3.11d d.ispN .J of p:co:p crly u o o . . o o o o o. the same right; to oo·.:traot, ·~111: same to S1..te and the same liabHit,::· -bo lJ:.> r:;,:od. ir 00::.;trac-b or in tort or otherwise 0 n The fact is that it is ]l'J.iza who entered 'i.n+,o t-0.11e?1c;r 2&eemcnt with the ,- rea:pondent a.na. this position was not D1::ii0:r~d ·oy he:-:;:- r.. a:rl'iago unless by o:x;press a.ction on her parto In thD,t vein the ap:pelJ.a11t Fr~1k had.no locus stan.di in this mattero It •,i;ss thoJ.:"0fo1~e orrenou.s on tl:..c :9axt of both the Regional Housing Tribunal and the Ly:peds Housing Trib1.muJ. not to accord this issue the attent-ion it deson7edv Ra.ct it done oo 1:io-th tribunals would not have entert~n'3d_ the aprlicdion ty tho o:9r,licant/ a;ppellant / Frank. Tb.is then disposes ·of ground six of tho a:Vi?GaJ.1i I shall deal with grounds

_1 ana. 3 together as theJ a.I'e related.o ,.t The appellant has complained thc,t since the proceedings RH Tribunal were bad tmlaw, the Appeals TribuncJ. ;:;J.1ouJ.d not hc~v-0 acted on tho srune in ~ 1 determing the appeal., I have gone tlu~ough the reoo:rd. o:f the Rcg:i.oncl :S:01.l:c:i.i::g TJ:-i'bunal and "' I agree w~ th the observation made on :page 3 :pr,:ra 2 0:f tr. o judgment of the vice-chairman of tho Appeals Tribt1110.J. "the _prccoedir.5s w0r0 ·baa.ly recorded ru1d. the judgment contained other mat.tors rlot 0?:nt::,.inec. i:n t:1e '}~.ea.clings However the Vio~cho.iman of the 2.p:::,02:.1s S°'T:i.1J1,~1al l1D.v-i:.--..g fo·,ma. that both the proceedings and the judsmont :r! tho fil.'T ;-ri.~ro found wa1:rtil1.g went 1 ;1 cl:l:oed Gl1d. determined the ap:poa.l b::-t.z5.00J..br b008u..':lo ·-i;ho v;ppr1i.lant 1.fa:s not ' OOofJoQ/3-,·, 3 the respondent 1 s tenant; that it was for Eliza to file tho complaint and not for the appellant to do so. Also the Appeals ·wouJ.d only proling the unholy alliance to the detriment I am sure of the respond0nt, as the appellant wouJ.d not vacate until tho determination of the hearing. I would therororc order no retriaJ..o The appellants second ground of appeal is that tho Appeals Tribunal oondemnod the appellant to be evicted for failure to pay rant but the appellant had ap:plied to pa:y direot to the Tribunal, a matt er not

considered by the Tribunal. I have read tho pro ceodings of the Regionru. Housing Tribunal a.nd in particular the evidence tendered by the appellant. The record in part if reproduced runs Blee this: " - - - I was told to-pay shs. 15,oOO/= But I think it is proper to pa:y shs. 10,000/= p.m. I pray that I should bo aJ.Yor-red to pay rentals l1_cr_q (i.eo at tha Tribunal) from Ist January, 19940 I am in rental arrears of 10 months to date- - - _fl Going th;rougb. the proceedings and judgment of the Regi~11al Housing Tribunal., there is no reforoncc to this preyer by the Tri bunale I would agree in this respect with the appellant th.at- the Il.egiona Housing Tribunal did not consider this option by the n:-ppellant. As for the appeals Tribuno.J. its dacision was influenced by two factors - one booausc tho appellant was not tho legal tenant and secondly 1)ecause the parti0s to tho dispute uero not in talking terms,. The ~pools Tribunal endorsed the cristanco of rent a.:r-.rea.rs but did not consido:;., the appollnnts prayer and option to deposit tho 10,000/= pm. rent at the Regional Housing ~ribuna.J.. 1 And. since this issue was not considered by both Tribunal, I agr00 It was a misdirection of facts and law., I would the1:eforo find for tho appellant in this regard. On ·ground 4 - again both the proccedines ana. ju.dgmcnt of tho Regional Rousing Tribunal arc silent on the issue of

directing the landlady to cq:>ply for assessment of standard rant before raising rent. l; The same was raj_scd by the vice ohail."Illa.n in his judgmcnta In that r i regard I do not sec how the_ vice t,Lt,irma,n of the .Appeals T1,ibunru. misdirected himself, On gr-ound five_, I agree with tho ~pellant that both Tribunals did not address their mind to the issue of tr..o landlady 1 s duty to off cot repairs ~n tl1e mtl t _house. But. then considering tho sour relationship that exists between the pr:.rtios· ( I 112..s able to see that in Gov.rt) how could the respondent have manaGod to ca:rry not tho repairs when she could not even {J:J ncm-- her_ ho1.i_s0 to collect rent? J ~ :f- .- i - 4 In the final event I allow this ci.ppeaJ. in as far as grounds 1,2, 3 and 5 arc concerned but disallow tho c:?ppod ,as contE-.inod in grounds 4 r.nd six as explained in ny jud.GDent. I' clso echo tho jud9:1ont of the vice-cbai:rl:k1.11. of the .'l.ppoals Trilnmtl in that tho appellant vacate the suit proniscs after settling' tho rent aJ:Toars as agrood bctwocm the tenant ELIZA. and tho respondent. .'\.s undicatod before uc, the appellant and his wife to vacate the sUit promises by 1.12.95. Tho ros:pondcnt is ad.vised to apply before tho Tribunal to have tho str.ndard rent assessed and fixed for the suit prcniseso Tho a:pporu. being partly ru.loucd, I noke no order as to co·sts. 1\·. l , - I __,, ' • ,~ r· _. l_tl ;,( ,1, .A·, A. a. BUBJ:EII

JUDGE 10.11.95 / ~, Tho D-]?J?ollant to praJr tho rospondent rent arrears on . 28/11/95 before the llec;ist:rar. <. :Jt--- (J)J,,.1 1 _~J"~ : A. G. JfuJBSITI JUDG.m 10.11.95 t ~ f