george benjamin ferdandes vs registrar of titles another 2021 tzca 664 4 november 2021

george benjamin ferdandes vs registrar of titles another 2021 tzca 664 4 november 2021

The appellant acquired the disputed plot through fraudulent means, being privy to and participating in the fraud. The revocation of his title and rectification of the land register were justified under section 99(2) of the Land Registration Act. The appellant is not entitled to indemnity, as he substantially contributed to the loss by his own fraud.

Citation
george benjamin ferdandes vs registrar of titles another 2021 tzca 664 4 november 2021
Parties
Appellant: George Benjamin Ferdandes; 1st Respondent: Registrar of Titles; 2nd Respondent: Anna Kibibi Marealle
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
4 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rectification of Land Register, Fraudulent Title Acquisition, Revocation of Right of Occupancy, Indemnity Under Land Registration
Source Language
English
Land Law Property Law Rectification of Land Register Fraudulent Title Acquisition Revocation of Right of Occupancy Indemnity Under Land Registration

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

Parties

George Benjamin Ferdandes

Appellant

Registrar of Titles

1st Respondent

Anna Kibibi Marealle

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the rectification of the land register revoking the appellant's title was justified under the Land Registration Act
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was privy to or participated in the fraud leading to his acquisition of the disputed land
  3. 3 Whether the appellant is entitled to indemnity from the government for loss of title

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant acquired the disputed plot through fraudulent means, being privy to and participating in the fraud. The revocation of his title and rectification of the land register were justified under section 99(2) of the Land Registration Act. The appellant is not entitled to indemnity, as he substantially contributed to the loss by his own fraud.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed in its entirety with costs.