19710510 TZHC Mwanza6

- - IH .E HIGH COURT CF TINZiHIL LT rJ1T\TZJ. Lr•pellate Jurisdiction. PC) CIUIL L PPE.L I HO. 135 CD 1970 ( (Fran the decisi on of the District Ccurt of Bukoba District at Bukoba in Civil ppeal Hi .404 of Original Civil Case Nc.75 of 1960 of the Primary Court at Irahagaine.) HTJRBERT HUG-IZ 1PPELLNT(Orig. Defendant) versus (1 .CD[.D mrr .RESP0D.,ENT(Orig. P1aintiff) JUDGII81\IT, EL-KINDY, g .J. Hurbert ugiziba appealed against the decision of the District Court vich ordered that sale of the appellant's ahaob should proceed as ordered by the primary court in order t IT for the balance of decretol amount unpaid. I must cnfoss the appellant's camplaint is impossible Isk to understand H he is no ignorant person. He agreed that he entered into agccment with the respondent whereby the rescndcnt let to him 3 iojms in his house at the agreed rate of hs.l50/'- per nnnth The agreement was engine ily to last for. 3 months but in fact he e7eained in the house for 8 months. The rosnan- dent was thcrefcire entitled to full rent for the 8 months, The aiTpclla nt agroe to pay him, and entered intr agreement to liciuidate this 1mount by monthly instalment but after payig for two months ho stopped and began to argue that he waslihI but the company he had formed was liable, when he knew well that the comtant was not liable. He was ordered to pay shs,96O/ to the appellant, with costs, when he was

sued in the local court in 1960. Ho appealed tc the then appellate court at Rwawishenye and to the District Commissioner but he lost. He agreed to pay t' e amount by instalment, and he paid in two nt.'Ts and thereafter efaulcd and by various devious tricks he stakd payment of the ialance of decretal amount. The respondent was then advised andi;L he took execution proceedings, hut the appclleot. became violent nd armed police had to see that the sale went thrnugh The sale was about to he completed when the appellant rushed to the District Court when he managed to stop sale proceedings pon.ing inv6st iga tion of his complaint. The District Court invcstigaed his complaints and found that they had n merits. He the appealed tc this Court. like the other two lower courts 9 I find the comulaint was baseless. t was the appellant who was troublesome all -2- along while the respondent has been very accorimodating. In the circumstancs, I ordered that the sale of his shamba should proceed crthwith rithcut any further delay to realise the hal4nce of the decretal nrcunt and full coss so far, unless he apellant and respondent reached agreecot othcrwise The respondent is entitle to full costs and I fix those at sh200/-. This appeal is accordingly dismissed I)eliveed in 'cart on 10th May, 1971 (z.N. EL KINDY.) i:iNG J1IDCTE.