20171130 TZHC Dodoma4

''ORIGINAL'' IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA DODOMA DISTRICT REGISTRY AT DODOMA MISC. LAND APPEAL NO. 21 OF 2017 (La.nd Appeal No, 21 of 2016, KONDOA District Land and Housing Tribunal, ORIGINAL HONDOMAIRO WARD TRIBUNAL) MAULID JUMA HINTAY .............................. .APPELLANT VERSUS SAID KOLO KITABASI ................................. RESPONDENT JU,DGEMEN-T Date of JUDGEMENT- 30/11/2017 Mansoor, J: Fatina Juma Hintay appears for Maulid Juma Hintay under the Special Power of Attorney issued to her on 15 th June 2016, and registered with the Registrar of Titles on 25 th October 2016. The plot in dispute is situate at Mwembeni Village within Kondoa District in Dodoma Region. 1 ''ORIGINAL'' Said Kolo Kitabasi, the respondent herein filed a claim at Hondomairo Ward Tribunal. He claimed that the Appellant herein encroached his land, about 4 acres. That he was given the. land by his father. The Respondent's father b_oll.ght the land from the appellant in 1992. He said his father died in 2009, but gave him this land since 2000 before he died. He - -- -prodiic-ed the -sale· agreement-at-the Ward-Tribu-nal but __________ _ the Ward tribunal did not consider it. The Appellant denies to have ever sold the land to the appellant's father but agreeing to have leased it for two ·years for a consideration of THz 4,000. The respondent lost at the Ward Tribunal, he filed an appeal at the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Kondoa, and he won the appeal. The District Land and 2 "ORIGINAL" Housing Tribunal relied heavily on the sale agreement which was rejected by the Ward Tribunal as proof that the land in dispute was sold by the appellant to the respondent's late father on 22 nd December 1992. The Appellant was aggrieved by the decision of the District ban-d-and Housing Tribunal,_ h_e rnage_~f! app~al to this court saying that the sale agreement was a forgery, and that he never sold the land to the appellant's -------fatber-fiufTie orilyleased-tt-for-two-years-.---------------------- The respondent's witness at the Ward Tribunal was Mohamed Idd Dudu, he said he was the witness when the Appellant was selling the land to the respondent's father, and that the Appellants received the money and the agreement was reduced in writing. 3 iJ "ORIGINAL" Mohamed Goro also testified on behalf of the Respondent, and he also witnessed the sale between the Appellant and the late Kolo Katabasi in 1992. I also have seen the agreement reduced in writing and signed by Hintay. The witnesses to this agreement were Mohamed Gora and Mohamed Idd. They both testified at the Ward Tribunal to have witnessed the sale of 4 acres land between the late Kolo Katabasi and Maulidi Juma Hintay for a consideration ofTHz 4,000 ... The respondent was therefore able to prove the sale of the land to his father by the appellant but the appellant failed to prove that there was no sale but he only leased the land to the respondent's father for to years. 4 . "ORIGINAL" Based on the evidence presented at the Trial Tribunal, this Court is in agreement with the decision of the District Land and Housing Tribunal of Kondoa, and therefore the appeal lacks merits and it is hereby dismissed, with costs. Appeal dismissed with costs. DATED at DODOMA this 3QTH day of NOVEMBER, 2017. JUDGE 30™ NOVEMBER, 2017 5