20120814 TZHC Mwanza

._"<'°)-: ... - ~~..,:..:...!-ZJ \ \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE DISTRICT REGISTRY ATMWANZA . (PC) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 39 OF 2010 (Originating from Mugeta Primary Court Civil Case No. 15/2008 of Bunda District Court Civil App. No. 26/2008) MATUTU KIRUGARA ............................ APPELLANT VERSUS ANASTAZIA MWITA ■- ••••••••••••••••••••••• RESPONDENT JUDGMENT SUMARI, J. This is a second appeal which has raised a point of law in ground two, that the trial Primary Court and the District Court in its appellate jurisdiction had no jurisdiction to entertain the matter because the case was purely a land dispute. I have gone through the evidence on record, I am satisfied that the 2nd ground of appeal by the appellant has merit. It has merit because from the evidence on record the whole dispute is over the land dispute. Each of the parties is claiming to have planted the cotton in the farm in issue. Though the said cotton is said to be the subject matter in dispute, in essence the issue of ownership of the land is the mc1in factor of the dispute. ~""~· -- The Primary Court's have no jurisdiction to entertain matters where land dispute is involved. The jurisdiction is ousted by S. 4 (1) of the Land Disputes Act, Cap. 216 of the Laws (R.E. 2002); which provides:- "Unless otherwise provided by the Land Act, no Magistrates Courts established by the Magistrates' Courts Act, shall have civil jurisdiction in any matter under the Land Act and the Village Land Act". Subsequent to the above provisions, both the lower courts erred in entertaining the land dispute since had no jurisdiction. It follows therefore that the whole proceedings and decisions of both lower courts were nullity. I therefore declare the same null and void. The appeal is allowed with costs. ~~· A.N.M. SUMARI JUDGE AT MWANZA 14/08/2012 2