mohamed akbar vs mark danhi bomani and others 2020 tzhclandd 3998 14 december 2020

mohamed akbar vs mark danhi bomani and others 2020 tzhclandd 3998 14 december 2020

The plaintiff failed to prove that he is the same person as the one named in the documents relied upon, and the evidence presented contained inconsistencies in names and identity. Therefore, the court could not determine the plaintiff's entitlement to the land or the alleged fraud.

Citation
mohamed akbar vs mark danhi bomani and others 2020 tzhclandd 3998 14 december 2020
Parties
Plaintiff: Mohamed Akbar; 1st Defendant: Mark Danhi Bomani; 2nd Defendant: Bagamoyo District Council; 3rd Defendant: The Commissioner for Lands; 4th Defendant: The Honorable Attorney General
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
14 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Outcome
Suit struck out
Legal Topics
Ownership of Land, Fraud, Impersonation, Title to Land, Survey and Resurvey of Land
Source Language
English
Land Law Ownership of Land Fraud Impersonation Title to Land Survey and Resurvey of Land

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohamed Akbar

Plaintiff

Mark Danhi Bomani

1st Defendant

Bagamoyo District Council

2nd Defendant

The Commissioner for Lands

3rd Defendant

The Honorable Attorney General

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is the legal owner of Farm No. 2342 and 2343 at Kerege, Bagamoyo
  2. 2 Whether the grant of right of occupancy and title to the 1st defendant was fraudulent and illegal
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff proved the alleged impersonation and forgery

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to prove that he is the same person as the one named in the documents relied upon, and the evidence presented contained inconsistencies in names and identity. Therefore, the court could not determine the plaintiff's entitlement to the land or the alleged fraud.

Court Disposition

Suit struck out

Orders

  • The suit is struck out.