19800226 TZHC Mwanza1

67c- THE IflGH COURT OF TANZMJIA - AT hWANZA (Pa) CIL APPEAL NO. 129 OF 1979 (From the decision of the district court of NG-UDU district at NGUDTJ in civil appeal No. 24 of 1979) Before J. S. KAGINE 9 Esa., DISTRICT MAGISTRATE (Original Ngulla Primary Court Civil Case No. 25 of 1978) LffASELI.A. lcG HO1LUELE .,. . . . . . . . ................ . . . . . . . , A.PPELL.ANT - VERSUS KA.LIK.ALI 11BAGtJIE ..................................... RESPONDENT JUDGMENT MU1\WERA, J. The appellant sued the respondent for recovery of 16 head of cattle. The case arose like thisi The appellant is the nephew of the respondent 9 that is; the son of his half brother. The girl Ngai whose bridewealth caused despute is the niece of the appel- lant, that is his sister's daughter. Ngai was an illegitimate child so she had to remain with her mother's parents. In fact she was brought up by her grandfather, the half brother of the respondent and the father of the appellant. The old man, died and the girl Ngai moved to the respondent, the half brother of her grand father. There she was married and 16 head of cattle were paid for her and the respondent received them. The appellant claimed these cattle on ground that 'he is the direct heir of his father and is entitled to receive Ngai's bride wealth and not the respondent. The trial court dismissed his claim on ground that when Ngai's grandfather (appellant's father) died. Ngai moved to the respondent so the respondent was entitled to receive her bridewealth. The appellant appealed to the District Court of Ngudu but his appe.l was dismissed on ground that there was no evidence that the appellant is the heir of Ngai's grand father. The appellant appealed further to this Court and his argument is the same that he is the direct heir of his father (Ngai's grandfather) and is entitled to the bridewealth. The appellants complaint is quite genuine. The learned District Magistrate correctly directed himself that in case of an illegitimate girl, her bridewealth will be received by her grandfather or his heirs. In this case Ngai' s bridewealth was to be received by 'her grandfather but the grandfather d-ied. It is undesputed that the appellant is the son of Ngai's grandfather. In other words Ngai' s mother and the appellant are of the same father and mother. The appellant is therefore the direct heir of his father. The respbndent who is a half brother (same father but different mothers) of the appellant's father cannot take priority. I don't understand the learned District Magistrate when he wrote "the appellant would have 'been entitled to the 'oridewealth if there would have been material evidence that he was the heir of his late father," ./2 I The inhoritance in SukumaJ.airid is patrilineal. Rule l9of he Law of Inhetance Rules 9 G.N 436/63 (Applicable to Ngudu District) provides that the principal hei.r is. the first scn of the deced' s senior house but if there be none, a.y eldt sen cf any house.; There was no despute in the trial as to., the position of the ap'i lant. That is.wby I dont understand what evidence else the learned District Magistrate wanted. I allow the appeal 9 reverse the decisions of the twocourts below and substitute an order giving judgment fdr the appJlant. The 16 head of cattle will go to the appellant and the resondent will pay the costs i - bree courts. .... Ic Lt •1 - -2! r a