grace joachim mallya v gasper vincent marunda 2022 tzhc 15837 18 november 2022
The appeal is allowed to the extent of substituting the division of assets with the parties' agreed settlement; other trial court orders are upheld.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- grace joachim mallya v gasper vincent marunda 2022 tzhc 15837 18 november 2022
- Parties
- Appellant: Grace Joachim Mallya; Respondent: Gasper Vincent Marunda
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 18 November 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Matrimonial Property Division, Custody of Children, Divorce
- 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
Grace Joachim Mallya
Appellant
Gasper Vincent Marunda
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 whether the division of matrimonial property by the trial court was correct
- 2 whether the custody of children was properly considered in property division
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is allowed to the extent of substituting the division of assets with the parties' agreed settlement; other trial court orders are upheld.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed in part
Orders
- division of assets quashed and substituted with settlement terms
- other trial court orders upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA TEMEKE HIGH COURT SUB-REGISTRY (ONE STOP JUDICIAL CENTRE) AT TEMEKE CIVIL APPEAL NO. NO 15 OF 2022 (Originating from Matrimonial Cause No.20 o f2020 o f District Court ofliaia before Hon. F.E.Luvinga-RM) GRACE JOACHIM MALLYA............................................. APPELLANT VERSUS GASPER VINCENT MARUNDA.................................... RESPONDENT JUDGMENT Date of last Order: 3/11/2022 Date o fJudgment: 18/11/2022 OMARI, J.: After being dissatisfied with the decision of theDistrict Court of Ilala at Kinyerezi in Matrimonial Cause No. 20 of 2020theAppellant has filed an appeal with the following grounds of appeal: Page 1 of 4 i. That the trial magistrate erred in iaw and in fact by granting a decree o f divorce in the absence o f legally acceptable grounds for divorce. //. That the trial magistrate erred in law and in fact by granting a decree o f divorce based on the illegally procured and defective certificate from the marriage reconciliation board. Hi. That the trial court erred in iaw and in fact for dividing fifty - fifty only the properties acquired by the Appellant and leaving other properties undivided. iv. That the trial Magistrate erred both in law and in fact for failure to consider and evaluate the evidence in record thus proceed to divide equally self - acquired property o f the Appellant. v. That the trial Court erred in law and in fact for unfairly dividing the alleged matrimonial properties without considering the fact that it is the Appellant who has the custody o f children. When the case was called for hearing, the Appellant prayed to be allowed to abandon her first and second grounds of appeal and she further informed the court that the parties had filed a deed of settlement. They addressed me on its terms. As a Matter of fact, they have agreed as follows: i. That the appellant be given: a. The plot and house be built on the said plot located at Zlmbili Street, Ukonga area, Tabata Kinyerezi Dar es Salaam. b. A unsurveyedplot located in Murieti Ward within Arusha Region. Page 2 of 4 c. A car, Toyota Prado with Registration No. T321ANS. d. Two 40 feet containers in the Zimbiii Property. ii. As his share in the Matrimonial assets, the following properties have been assigned to the respondent: a. A unsurveyed plot located at Chanika area, Hala District, Dar es Salaam. b. A generator model GEL22/W2. c. A car, Toyota Noah with Registration No. T189 DES. As the parties have sought and reached this amicable settlement, I grant their wishes. On that account, I hereby quash the division of the assets made by the trial Court and substitute it with the division described herein above. The other orders of the trial court are upheld. For the foregoing reasons the appeal is allowed in relation to the order of division of the assets to the stated extent. No orders as to costs. A.A. OMARI JUDGE 18/ 11/2022 Page 3 of 4 Court: - Judgment delivered in the presence of Grace Joachim Mallya the Appellant. Sgd. A.A. OMARI JUDGE 18/ 11/2022 Page 4 of 4