hazina saccos 20010101080143 safii

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (LAND DIVISION) AT DAR ES SALAAM LAND APPEAL NO. 27620 OF 2024 (Arising from the District Land and Housing Tribunal of Bagamoyo, at Bagamoyo in Land Application No. 209 of 2018 before Hon. LUNG'WECHA dated 2Sh day ofJuly, 2029, and extracted on the 5th September, 2024) HAZINA SACCOS.......................................................................... APPELLANT VERSUS VIVIAN CHARLES BUSHAIJA (MAMA PETER)........................................ 1stRESPONDENT ARICHARD LWIHULA KATO...................................................................... 2NDRESPONDENT PETER CHARLES BUSHAIJA................................................ 3rd RESPONDENT ANGELA CHARLES BUSHAIJA......................................................................... 4thRESPONDENT SANDRA JOHN MAGONGO............................................................................. 5thRESPONDENT MARIAM SUED MTAITA.................................................................................. 6thRESPONDENT RULING 03/03/2025 N.E. MAN DI A, J The appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment of the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Bagamoyo in Land Application No. 209 of 2018 dated 25.07.2024 appealed to this court on the following grounds: - 1. That, the Trial Chairperson erred in law and fact by deciare that the suit land belongs to the Respondents while there was no any counter claim. i 2. That, the Trial Chairperson erred in the law and fact by deciare that the suit property belongs to the both Respondents while the first respondent testified that she was a mere witness not owner of the suit land. 3. That, the trial Chairperson erred in the law nad fact by deciding the matter in favor of the Respondents by mere emotion and not as per the evidence adduced. 4. That, the trial chairperson erred in the law and fact by failure to consider the weight of evidence adduced by the Appellant and his witnesses and based on poor evidence adduced by the 1st Respondents and her witnesses. 5. That, the trial chairperson erred in the law and fact by deciare the suit land belong to the Respondent while the 2nnd up to &h Respondents neither testified nor showed up in the Trial Tribunal. 6. That, the trial chairperson erred in the law and fact by pronounce the suit land measured 50 acres belongs to the Respondents while the suit land was 60 acres. The appeal has however, encountered an impediment, coming by way of preliminary objection from the respondents that the appeal is hopelessly filed out of time. Mr. Edward Mkungano, learned counsel represented the applicant whereas the respondents enjoyed the legal services of Mr. Imam Hassan Daffa, learned counsel. When the matter was called for hearing of the preliminary objection on 03.03.2025, Mr. Mkungano appeared and Mr. Daffa was absent. When given the floor to address the court, Mr. Mkungano submitted that after going through the records, he has realized that it is true that the matter was filed out of time. The 2 counsel therefore, conceded to the preliminary objection raised by the respondents but prayed that the appeal be dismissed without costs. Having heard Mr. Mkungano, and after going through the record, I have noted that the impugned decision was delivered on 25.07.2024 while the instant appeal was filed before this court on 03.11.2024. According to section 41(2) of the Land Disputes Courts Act [Cap. 216 R.E 2019], appeals from the District Land and Housing Tribunal in the exercise of its original jurisdiction may be lodged to the High Court within 45 days after the date of the decision or order. In the circumstance, counting from the date when the decision was delivered which was 25.07.2024, the appeal may have been lodged on 08.09.2024. It is clear from the record that the appeal was filed out of time. In the circumstance, the preliminary objection raised by the respondents and conceded by the applicant is sustained. The appeal is dismissed. Each party will bear its own costs. It is so ordered. 3