19710720 TZHC Mwanza
The respondent adduced sufficient evidence of ownership, and the appellant failed to rebut or cross-examine; thus, restoration of the cattle was justified.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19710720 TZHC Mwanza
- Parties
- Appellant: Ginahariya Nyankungu; Respondent: Hagaiwa Kasonkwa
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 20 July 1971
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Objection to Attachment, Ownership of Property, Execution Proceedings
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ginahariya Nyankungu
Appellant
Hagaiwa Kasonkwa
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 12 head of cattle attached belonged to the respondent or were entrusted by Nyang'ahu Mangera to defeat execution
- 2 Whether the lower courts were justified in restoring the cattle to the respondent
Ratio Decidendi
The respondent adduced sufficient evidence of ownership, and the appellant failed to rebut or cross-examine; thus, restoration of the cattle was justified.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- Judgment transmitted to district court at Tarime for communication to parties
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
a I. LI IN JE HIGII COUFT OF TANZANIA AT I']WANZA Appellate Jurisdiction 'F c) CIVIL APPEAL N0 85 OF 1970 (Fran the decision the district court of North Ham in Civil Appeal j'T 0 58 of 1970 mfktim Zore C. A. Lwelengera Esq., district na:istrato - Original Civil Case No. 134 ' 1967 of Sirari primary Oou.rt), versi T OF 1GPIAGE&I1AIdJP J : : : :RE:DT AUG 1971 IUSANGA, Ag.J. In this case t would appeor that the appellant Ginahariya ITyankungu hold a decree oainst one Nyang'ahuh 'era for thorecovery of some cattle, and that in an attept to execute that decree SOflC 12 head of cattle were atoched from the rspondent Hag aigwa Kasonaxwa Following the said attach- mont, the respondent lodged an objection in the pririory court at Sirari where the court allowed the objection in port and. restored 10 head of cattle to the respondent. Disatjsfjed with the award, the respondent appealed to the district court at Tin ich allowed his c1ai and restored the remaining two head- of cattle 'o him. The appellant is now appealing against that (loCisi on. The appellant appears to cantend that the 12 head of cattle beloag to Nyeng ahu Mangera, nd that Nyangt ahu took and entrusted these cattle with the respondent in ari attempt to defeat execution by the appellant of the decree which he hold against the said Nyang' ahu. The learned district magistrate was satified that the respondent had adduced saiuicient edonce to shovv that the 12 head of cattle voro his. He did so by producing tickets showing that he had bout abme of the cattlo at an auction and by calling witnesses who said ¶at they sold to or e::changod with him SOUC of the cattle, nd other winessos who said that they saw the respondent receive the cattle as brideprico The aenellant did not cros-oxaaine the resnondent and his Witnesses n r did he load any evidence to show that any of the 12 boasts did not bob g to the respondent. In the circumstances, I an satisiiedthat the ower court was justified in restoring the remaining two head of cattle o the respondent and accordingly I would dismiss the appeal with c osts In order to s the costs of uching another trip to Nvianza, this judaent is, at the 0uet of both parties, traniiitted to the district court at To.riuo whi should susnon the Parties ,;d to them. I.TFAEA, (F. i; Iasaiga) V 20 7,1971, Ag .JUDGE:; 4'