19740209 TZHC Mwanza
The appellant failed to establish his claim for the return of cattle, as credible evidence showed all cattle had been returned and no further claim was made at the relevant time.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19740209 TZHC Mwanza
- Parties
- Appellant: Mataro Nyainaga; Respondent: Rioba Wambura
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 9 February 1974
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Second Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Recovery of Property, Compensation for Elopement, Appeals
- 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
Mataro Nyainaga
Appellant
Rioba Wambura
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to recover the remainder of cattle allegedly owed by the respondent after the end of the association with respondent's daughter
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant failed to establish his claim for the return of cattle, as credible evidence showed all cattle had been returned and no further claim was made at the relevant time.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- appellant to pay Shs. 65 as costs for the appeal, inclusive of Shs. 42 fare
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
( .C. IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT MWANZA (PC) CI(TIL APPEAL No0 74 OF 1974 (From the decision of the Ditrict Court of North Nara at Tarime in. Civil Appeal No., 271 of1969 - Before C.A. Lwelengera, Esq., D. M. and Namwag y P.C. Civil Case No0 221/69) MATARO NYAINAGA APPELLANT versus RIOBA WAMBURA 0 0 0 0 ..... ............... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 RESPONDENT JUDGMENT MAKANE, J.: This; is a second appeal0 The appellant who, as plaintiff, instituted a suit against the present respondent at Nyamwaga Primary Court )failed to establish his claim for twelve head of cattle0 His appeal to the District Court Tarime was dismissed, and quite rightly in m4 view0 It was common grotind that the appellant had run away with.the respondent's daughter and that he was made to pay some cattle as compensation for the e)opemento The evidence was that, for one reason or another, seven headof cattle were returned to him while his association with the r+sponderltts daughter was still continuing0 When he and the responent's daughter finally parted company he claimed to be given back the remainder of his animals0 The evidence of HA'JA ROBI, the Division Secetary, was loud and clear that when the remain- ing cattle (whether they were 33 or 32) were returned to the appellant this was done in his, j±e Divisional Secretary's, presence, arid that the pellant never toid him that the respondent had still to return other cattle. The trial Primary Court Magistrate concurred with both his Gentlemen assessorL that the claim had not been established and the District MagistratL on appeal agreed with them0 I find no reason which would soundly peksuade me to differ0 Accordingly I dismissed this appeal. Unlike the appellnt, the respondent attended the hearing of this appeal and I order tha the appellant should pay Shs. 65/— as costs for the appeal, inclusve of Shs 0 42/— fare. - ARUSHA: MAKANE 9th February, 1974. JUDGE (. - li j 'A