20040414 TZHC Moshi

IN THE lUGH COU.R'.r OF rl';'\.NZ.:'..::IA - AT MClSHI ..• \, (PC) CIVIL APPZAL N0o55/20O2 . .. . C/F DC MOSHI CIVIL APPii:AL NO. 11/2002 ORIGINA.L MOSHl URBAN PR. COUIIT PROB. & ADM1'!.C1\;;;"!; NO. 6 OF 2002 . ... ' . Vihl'l.SU .S .- ... ◄ .;.:"~ . ' •· ~AI<tmarir; ·,r.. .... ' . . • ,,1. .... .. ,., ,:;·" the late Majo~.· Charl~ .. . .,1.-.1. ~ ~ ,t:!JochiMbwe.m~, ~l'j.e~i.ed;ti..ntestate 'on 1st A1.:.gu.st, ;::co1. '..':lc b-:o bd lived together :for five ·years before death parted the;.1. T:10 Ho~:::1cJ.:;:.-:.t :.3 the ' '~ ·. moth~ of' the -dec~d,~ , I~ is a -conceded fa.ct that dt:rbs tl-:.0 ,:·:.i½~- ~Etcn~e 'ef ~~ir· ~~i~~~: ... . t~~· ~ppeJ~ant and her dec~ascd hust,a:1d 1·18~··ctt~ ::'c-rtuoote . . ·e:116ugh to be. Jilessed w~th ~ny~:~e. -~" .. . .. ·,: _. .. ·, .., _,._., die ·childless• He was survived by _.,t Vonly children born of di'fferen~ fuqihfrs, wmf are reooc;nized bj th-:,,...d;c.;a~:!d. 0 ·.. / ·u.vtiig with the Respondentl. . . ., :::..u .,,.,:.·;:· F.ifl.lowing the death tf Major G K ·_Mbwa1i1bo his clan members· me'b-'.:~mder 0 0 t~e <:hairmanship of Pd. 2 Iddi k~~-<; A-t that i'lCeting, the R'esporident · ;.... . . wa:s un!rd.~~~~y ,.recorprnen~ea_ to 'b~ the acl.irt{nish-ator of the deceaseq. esta;t~ .... . ·. . .- : . . " . ··•·•·i' • .. • • ,.Unfdrlunately, however, th~ appellant ne·ver /J.ttentl.etl. t!iat mecti~~ Jith ~- ...... ·.. . .. . : . '

. -~ \:; .. . ...the bl,~a and. rnand~te ,of ~he '<icecfsed"t\ t:l<?-11, . · . ·~ ,·. rle 9 p.o;-1dont applied e1c - before 'the Mashi bistrict. Prir;;i,rY. c9urt, 'r.:ioJ1{t Urban· to be ay:i,:·intc~f' the adm:tnis~atrix .• ' .. 6:f the. decea~ed ··;·t.. •. t~is was ·i~ Prob~. te o.nd ;,~ ;- i:ii~t~a tion \,, .. - . :.. eaui~"rlo.?- ~--2002 filed on 21st Jamw.fy, 2002. r·. . . ~ The· Respondent named the. .fol:l"bwing-t:·o'"!Th the •l-Je1:oficio.rie.s of the estate -of the late c.- K. J-'lbwambc:••- _.; ·• 2 ... 1. .Edmund C.•.K. Mbwambo 3-. J,.,hn c.K. Mbwambo 4. Jenepha c.K. Mbwnmbo 5. Mrs Secunda .C.. Mbwambo :, . C:-1.?'::>::\::_~_nt) 9• Rose Ramadha.ni (Respondent),..,·'' ,ihe-~ listed the. foll-0wing _pro,pertios: to _be formil1G the es-cQtc, ~~ the late Ma~r Mbwambo:- 1. One ho\.t.SC under -OOD.S-tru-ot ion.

2. One Plot at Ukone;a .......3-:.•. One Plot . '. .at fviba.gala '• :.: ·•.'. ..

4. One· Pistol. ·........ 1, .. ' •.;·· .. ;. ·j: ,5. OnG gu~_, •. 6.. Jx:a th gratui tias and; •t~r eciployi,1ont be.tic ti tri of t he <1,Aooa ~t• ·' -? , Moneys lying in . th~ :deceased . rs bc:mk .account• ~ If' eQOner had the_ appl~-00.tion for appointp~nt boen filed than it. was li~~ly resisted b! t~e appelia.4,t,, she fi].c:d· her caveat in early ~ .

2002. The mainstay 0°f her" :6bjccti6n ;p,s tl1·1.t shG feared that if tb4, R ~ t was to be a~inted as· the administra.trix af her husband .I I estet.e she would be. dis~imµiated against and r.1iss her lmi~ui sh.:;.re .:i,n ,the · • ' '!.: :·. estate, She.. predicated .this .,, . ;fear on the <loclc:i~r.ttions m'acte at the cl~J ... ' . . ..... ..:•· • • ~~ 't:6,. th.e e;t'f ect that slle was. n~· a member of this Mowo.olvo clan 'b.nd ~t~ : . .. . ~ ' • '"' : : -~ 1lad .not 11aa a ehild with their.son c.K~ Mbwambo. 1 The objection was givei;i ,. a full ·hearing by the tria.:L primary' coui't, but it raised no complicat-04 !, ~ ~ r s i ~ , eithe~ of fact or,•f law. ' ,, ';· The Re~dent assur.eq the trial court that she recoe;:;.'liz.ed tlie: app,1- ··: lant as ct'1aw:t.ul surviving °"~~her son and that; .if ~wointed she w~ . . . ' I' IIJ9.ke sure. that she gets ;-_3r fightful entitle::;c!1t in the estate' of• her i.at:a • r -l:m,i~ !.'hG. same recogni t:i,.011 and assura:ic es wo:-e given by Pr/. 2 Iddie, All° these .did not. impress the appellant. In ~1cr e-.r::.d.ence and thnt of hel' ··wit- -• I •• ·". nesses, 'DW.2 Assey (who is married to t~,.c· s~-~i:c::-·· c: t'..ie ·cl.p:;:-iellant) and DW.3 ... ., .. 3 t ~ n t in the distribution of assets of her late husband• s e.!ltate because ' t:f.' the misunderstandings between her en the one side and the Respondent

and . -~la:?,iiembers. on th_e othero · The trial court at first appeared to ha·,rc e;rn.G)ed t~1e crucial issu~ .. , . • e o e er • ·e N!;,.- "O'&Oision before it. In it's judgement t}1e trial p:".':ipc.1.ry court propnrly directed itaelf when it said:- :1 0 Kitu muhimu ni kwamba tunachunguza ni na1µ .. anastahili ku'l'Ja msimamizi wa mil'nthi hii, .~1~0.,1:,.i . . : _, .... .. ~ kukusany ma:lf ya marehemu, pili kuli:n m:::,.de!1i.. . . . ' . -· .. ···•·•-·- lcwaml;>a anao~ SM, 1 hatumtcndca ~w.ki, walc::.t~ .. bado haujafikia. :: ll1' ahort, the trial court, invicw of the evidc;1ce before it, found it.sea llarv-ing one- vital issue for decision, that is ~~ ,appoint an administ.r-a.tor ~~ will diligently and faithfully administcd t>,i e;-;-cate of the late Major C.K. Mbwambo. 'bT-oollecting the properties of t!ie dcccc.3e:cl o.::"1. t:,~ debts that ef . ·!& the decea.sed and ·costs. of the administmtion and th.:reaft:::r to dist:.~fbuto ;~ the estate to the persons entitled there~o. It is ver;:· u~1forh;nc.te th.:i.t ·.:, and ap-~oint tt·\t thereafter it filtered and failed to l'!lctke up its 1::ind suitable person. ! have advisedly said that the trial 001.fft "jai_led to ::nke U::,J it.s mind.= 1 This is because of the final. dccisio11 it cv1.;i:itualJ.:1· reached or • ma.de. · In wha,t is pat.o~tly seen o.s a l,"lcl: of fir:mncss ( or a:1 obvious i.ndt- · eisi<:m,} the .

. trial court soekin[; shel tor bel1ind the li:lck of trust by the -: - appellant of. the Respond.e:·.t, decided to appoint thc--.i to be joint administra. trixe.s ot the said estate :ifor the benefit of. t}w family. 11 But it went even i\U'ther ~tha.r/ tha:t. In a rather appallin:l; order, it d:i,rected the administra.. . 'l> . • : • . .. : I . . -tors aft~r--•dllecting. the properties ,and t~~~ d_ot·fs of the estat<fi te surre- nder the remaining propert'.ies to the trial co·.,:::'c ~.".: ::f'..f for distribution to the entitled beneficiaries by it. ~ -- -- ..... - - - · ~ -- -------- ...,! i ,- ..) 4 ... These grotesque orders did not amuse the app0Ennt. ' District Cour,t of Moshi on app~"\l to challen5ei tl.10 e:1tfrc dcc_fai~m •. · •. : • • • ' •• : o1 ••• • •:~!~~::-- .· . . ...app~~J; . ..The r .. .was •handled . by ~1r~·-·1. ,.Mson'.ja• ,,/.retired ::?·rincip,i.l Distr'ict. I ,·1.!re ~ie~tat:e.,-:ih, his capacity as Hon-orr...::..-~r Ma:~istrat0. Ji0 2:;o. v_c cl. highly ;' . . .. .. •·:; :'•_•}·"'~ !.:..-.-- illuminating Judgoment in ' r.7 obj~ctivc _9:1L1icn ' . . : which he 1ffot0 in 1aswahili. ~ ~ • • • • Ir, •• • I • • After giving:·a: br-i1~f:: backerrumJ.. of t:.1c '}a.::io 6;11d··e. ·rosume ·0r the evidence ,· . •'. ...,. ·►' proff~~~~f .by both sides~ he had t:.-~cse :i.nstructivc words to tell the liti;.:, ' I . . glUlts and I think the trial magistr: 1.tc.s

who h.'..'\J:'.'·.(U0 · these ca:ses/~pplications:- 1:rt ,is important, before venturing fu).'t;10r into the appeal, to remind '.ourselves of t~1e objectives ·and pur:poses of haying_ an adrninistrat.or o:' t;:rn decef.:..sed I • •' j .••• j ... : , ... estate. I I I I The ebjective of appointii1tI an adminictr::-.tor_·... , '•"1t: I I ~f the estate is the need to have a faitJ·J~.!l 1:i.:;rson I I • • wholwill, I with • reasonable diligence, .::ollcct all ' .. . ••. ..tJ10 p~ope~~es of.the.dec~asc1o.: )!f ~ill.do wit:1,. so. ¥,._,; .: · ·•. tloo 1isole ~m of distributing the &:i1!1e t_~ all t'.:o3e I . . . - ,. ... ·. . w~o :f"'ere· ·dep-3ndants oft hq dJceas-:id·. durin~ his lif~ .... e .t.it,10 • ,; IT'he adm_inistr.::~to.r·, ::.n adc'.iti°o~'~- has. thc:··cruty ·:;:·· 1 I ,d- .c\ollecting a.11 tl'>.e de'.)·.~~ c~,w to the deceased and I i-ny all. I the ·a.ebts mm.d b~, the dcccnscd. If .the deceased left children be~1in-:i, it is th0 res:)onsibi- ·lity• of t?e adm_inistr.:ttor to o:,su:1'3 t:1;,1t th,.;;y ar0 l)l"Operly taken cnre of and v10J.l . br9u3l1t ~l) ,.:Gi1i,:, •, the· properties left behind by t110ir d0cet:t.s•xl pr.::·0:.-ato •·••f1.fter the administrator has so faithf\.111~• .:.~c~:-.1:i.n~:..~te~ · red and distributed .. tnc . properties . for;nin,:: ti~:~ \:-;.::ik{q· . . he has· a ·legal duty to file an ~r;ventory. in t:1e :. c.ourt 'which made the appointment

givi..!13 a :! ;,~9count of the administration of the ent.:.t0. · ']~~:..:.s • -· - ---· .=:=--------- ·- • was distributed and thus dissa.tisfied to lod3ehis/ f+er e,ompla:i.nts to the court 'Nh.i~Il .would in'_ ti.::.rn I.· .. . , _-.. : ·- - . :tn;est:i.gat~ the sam_e and. de.Gide the matt Gr in accordance with the dictates of the la,v. In view of all this, it is evident th,at the ad:'.li~1istr2-tor is ... not supposed to collect and monopolise tl~e deccased-;-s .. properties and u:::.e t:1ern as Lis. ovm and/or di~sipate · them as he wi.she..;; but he has the unenvit9:ble heavy respon,.c,ib:i.lity which. he t:as to diGcharge on behalf •,,' of the deceas~d. The adrnini:3tr,tor c:iight come from ... amongst the beneficiar'_ies of the estate, 1?ut he has ' -to be very care'f,ul and imp.::rt :Lal di:stribut es the . esta. te • furyhermo:::>e, it mu,:,-i:; by now be very obvious to a:Ll, tha tt,-such an a:dministr::·:tor . must be a person who. is very' close 1to ·the dGC'c;S.3Jd I • • ,, . ~ • • and can therefore,. ea>:3i:j.,y id•entify the ,proi)ert:.::-.::; of . . .. ,.._/:-. ...... . the deceased. . He must alsq have the co11fid2 · o~ all the beneficiaries •':'-,. or dependants of the ck . : . Such a pei·son may _·be ~he w~dow o::- the i·ddovm 7 . . . . . . . ,.,_ •.: . , • parent or child Of' the de~eased :br any: other close -. ~ .. . . . .....• ,'.. available or if. they

m~e found to be 11J11fit in one r ·'.·i ··'·· way ·or another, then. the .,fO?rt ~:1a,s_ ,the powers to ·, ::. · · appoint any oth~r {H !)er.son o:::-· aut 1·J.o:d ty to discharge • ... ,. ' j .~ :,,;' • ~ ·... : · this duty•:: · Thia,. :t,o me, is a classic exposition, whic> full~: ::iu'.)scT:i.1::2 to, of the qualifications of a person fit to be appointed as an ad.;nir,i.~~r:-,tor ~-r administratix an:d his/her functions, duties and/or rezpo:'.~~',-:_1ities 0 ... ,: That is the actual positi01, of ~-ur law. If all of us we:,"-:, to a.ih.orc to this at all times, it is my conviction thc.:.t there woulo. :.10. 0 ::- be0n less problems and protracted struggles in the appoinb:cL·::.: of a~::.:·::·::.,Jt:c.,.tors I. I 6 ~ ~ ~ i l,ot of s~lf' samfico to be an honest am1. fait::~ful administrator ef any estate • .. .Att~ the 11-arned appellate magistrate had so properly directed ~ l ! 'Oll. the ~neral. .q1J.alifioations and logo.lly- iin1Jo.:::cd. .!'';s::-,e;:-:.s::.bilities ~ any a.dministr'.3-tor-1 he proceeded to t.:=-.ke the bull b:I' th0 horns. He HValuated the personal qualities_ of y.,.0 o:i?:.,ella.l1t. and Hespoa"dent · guided by I • th& ,e,v-ide11ce on record :u:ci coi-..cedcd .f::-..:_te. .'\t the end of the exer,cise tha ~~d ~istrat·e found .the ·-appellant not a fit person in this pertieular .case to be appo0ted the-administrator of the estate of the late husband. lte

so <ie-cided after being satisf:ied t1mt the v1elfa.re of the four children J.t1lJ_ bo i!.n jeopardy if she is so appointed. l{e pru·.licatecl this stance an the fact that a1~ -al6ng. the appellant has shown no love f:::..~ tl:cm a1:1 that+s ~th{d--were .staying wit? __their grandmother (neepond.e;1t: .. ,;·, ,j,u:..~i:1e; li.£.e time of their fathe:r. · ::tt is not insignificaht to point ou·'.: l"Jr, th:--.t it ia not di.spued- 'that the last two children one by now agecl 11 :rears anc. 14 years respectively. He foundithe Respondent to.be a fit ;cr3cn to he the administrator of· the deceased Is este.te and who will be.st h;;.:·.c•i:' the i.r..terest and welfare of all the dependants at hc::i.rt~ ',After noting t:·.~t the Rc~pondellt !a yet to be given the opportunity to administer .estute h~ .~:'..3111t13.aed the ! ..,Qlltention s>f. th'e appellant•·~ ,ounsoJ. to the effect that the appellant would " be -di.scriminate&" against· a~' too· ~):c·c1;~"c,:·.-:.1·e~. · T~ District Court then proc-eded to set aside the•appointmcnt of t':~e appallMt_ as the co-administratrii of ,,~ the -$,stat,e. and appointed the Respond.ant· as th,;; sole adminis·~ratrix o:t the same• · It. also quite· rightly, qu~shed and s~t .:;:cide the abs,_:rd order of the trial~ .arrogating to _:i.tself the po\•;c:..·s cf clistributi:--•.: :,;'.10 nssets of tha d~♦ . s estate. The appel;Lant wa.s

dissatisfied ' . } anc. ~~--:-.:::e this appeal.- ' ·'. As 1n the District court the appelaa!nt was n.dvoeated. f,Yr in this appeal W learned counsel Mrs., E. Minda, while the Respond~nt stooc :.!1 her own •. 1 I bave carefully gone through the pet·ition of e.ppeo.l a;,.,:: Written SUbmissiQnS, ~. botp .. p:u-ties to this appeal • ., 1 The determination of this• appeal should be ,:ares if one should confi1le him- --~lf/he~~lf ~o- the :determining issue and leave a104';) extraneous argu,mcnts on ',lh6~- or! nbt'. the appellant will g·et her rightful share and U!1dE;r __ .what law • . ,,-: •• 1·.'. .: .. . . ,,. . The law (:i.~~-... the Magistrates' Courts Act, 1984 ). confers jursid-;~~t-ion · n . 1 '.: . • the. pri.r~ar/ c.bu~ts "t~ hear and· determin:e. administ:c.::..tioa of, de...::c.a.s.~d.';:; --~s~es cases whe~e the' law applicable to the/ ad:;;inistrati?:1, d;i.strib~t?.fr"... Sf th~ ... .auoceasio~ t6,. "the e~tafe is•·:-d·$t"@t11ary· 01' isla.mic law~ 'J;'he .i.e~1)~p9-ent here.in,' ·,follq~~;g :th~ ci.e~th 6':f l:01· oon, a;:r:,lied to be ap:poi~1ted ._)ho ,.admizi.i... stra;ri ~'.f l{~r son-i's· ostat~\l~der t:·.i's l:J.W, ... before the pz:imary ,co~.;. ; : :, ..,•· .J ,, ·. .. . ,..... · _ ~--. ... Fourtunately./the appellant· :i1ad no''objectiori t? the court ts jurisdtc~ion and · rt I· , she willingly submit"i:ed herself· to its -jurisdicti_on. · She· oniy

e,;it.~~ed a.· . . l . -~ caveat objecting to the appointment of the ncspondc~1t as the a.9-mJ...f'½~tratrix ,•. I · <'-f the estate. She woulti have pref~rrod· t-'.) '.:e t:.e o.-<.;i;Jinis·cr~.t~ixo _J ,. The issue here. is not the inheri ' ta-nee of the wztato of the . ~ r::ajor . ..l·.:1; . . . ·r . ,... ·. • • ., •.. : • . Charles IC, .J1bwamb6, arrd \illio will. get ·what· from th~,.t q;::;_ta~~- 1-J?~:.'?c ·...::-.:-:: to ·rea,h that"br{dge and"·so.'w~_cannot-cros,s it/bcfor,; \-NJ ·rc,:tc;::l1 it. V ~.:J,Xe ... -9''? her((:t's not ·whethet or 1t6t the:·ap~e~Iant· will get ·her ~):c?::;>e.:~!~~:!~/,)::: . " • •.. · .' ·1 -~_igbt:f'ul share i.Ii · the estate: of he:.~ u1,1disputed lat~ husba.."'1d. T-r.y~-·.: t:) . . . k I · ··resolue ·that ~ssue in proceedings ~t. -this nature would b-e ~npta:::)OUl').t. ,to, ; !' ,patting the .tiart before the !ibrse~ ·.:.-we. ·shall be fondtnrn.il),iS. -~h~ tq_ pc ad.mir.- nistra~'or un,he;rd/ The enly• deNn~inining i'ssue here: \•/Orth aiw_; ~?f_t9us _··: ,ionsidoration. ~1-·die~l-y dis~e-frie~:-~y··t\vo ·courts below j,ff.W~O ~::a,etwee~- •, . .. ,: ....... · . . . , . .. : ' the.,a.ppeJ:lan.~ and respon:d.int is a fot pai·-son to be appointed to· administet- • ; • ,~ ' .,. ..•. : ' ., • • 'l. t'he· :~state· .. ~f the i.:iter ~1aj"or c.1{. -~)'fowambd. · The Respondent was_ favourably ~ b;· ·botl( ..ourts ·b~lo,;., to be ·such·· fit

person• al though .:.:tu.•, tr;t~_l :prirm.·ry . ., .. ·.: . "~- . ,.. ,Couttt .'b8,d. iJl:i,. also. found t:1e appe:i'.lant ~ , ~ ! ~~ea with ~he appellate· District_. Cou·.:.t in atriking out Ir rove..:. king th~. appo;l.ntment of the appell~t by "th,: trial court for reasons vhich ••• ·I ' • we oWious ~ow as they were at the trial st0,ge as -:-an be gleaned ;frc?Ti ±~10 t'ea&ona which prompted the entering of the cbjcction. I ·C.-1.l! lil:0n t:_~.:it decision of the trial primary court to a decision th,".tt ho.s to s2.tisfy :~,-;o di-ff'erent and at bottom incompatible spccificatic:·.,s~ such a decision is not a decision but a :prC:iyer for a miracle• As past e~r.~ence. has· taught· us, the trouble with mirc.cles is not, after all, that:· 1 ~ ha,ppen rarely,;: it is that one· cannot r-el:r on them. In ,,the instant ca....9,,.ier th~ .tI'_~l court was legally bound, in the peculiar circumstances, _:to_ ·either appoint· the Respondent as the sole adininistratr.:i.x, or roject !1or. application, ~ ~ppoint: the appellant or any other.· fit person if it found pod1 of th~m: ·. r unfit for good reasons. By trying to appease both rnrties in a:71pointing. th«n -a.a joint administratrµ(?s :it was prayi:q.-e; for a miracle4_. .The Respondent applied to be a_ppointed t~1e administrc1.td~, being the I :: J• 1 •' ; mother of the deceased., By virtue of tl1is relationship, she had., in

law, '· ~ if .t_he .necess.i.rf ,q,.uhification to be so appobtod e Any in_t.e:.~,ested \ .J:ie~n •oming form and making an oojection to her ap_plicatioi:, had t; ., satisfy, the. cour,t. thti,t. despite meeting thin basic requirement, the ReS:P~. 1·•· '• ntent was not the type of ~rson who tould be trusted to administer th.,e : t • ' • " .,, . said estate, _pid.~he appellant .sutceed on this in her cbjection? My ~bject:Lw ~ e r to. _this qu0stion, aft,)r dis:;_nssionat0l;;~ going cv:cr her entire evi~ei;ice is ~' the negative,. Hor objection. w:,,,.s :)r8dico.tc:( 11:n::0,. ~ h~rli !eci.rs ~-~d feelings than provpn facts.· If aft;;,'.!-' :wr a::7po.L1t ''C::1t th~ ,._Respond_ent pr,oceeds to -a~-inist.er the estate unfaithfully or· i;1 _~ .. -~-·.:-ri-:- :;:m~t.fcy ~ 7:r;- o.r; ll,.l.: a.ny ~~her wa'l unsa t.is·fa.ct ory to t :10_ ap.::x~ll~ ·· ..-.__ aJ;1y -h·,.er. •.., .:"b·ene.1.ciary f. ' ·th e. la·~ . '4- gives tll ' d par t y tl_.,_o.rJ.q;ti:"·"' 1e aggrivc .. ,.,_ t o .0 'l -:::-;.,1 . r , . • 0• to apply_ for tho ·revocation of the appointmc~t., r,·, i,f a:ny I ., 1' J. •,., ,r . ~ the benef.iciaries will q.e dcnic_d his full ,¢nt'itlemcnts or p.art . :.~ it:,,._ -.he•. ·or, ?he will have a legal .:~:!ght to go • • ~ • • ... •: • to ccurt and.. clairn .the same· from: ' ' • • • { ; •••. • • •• • • ~. • • • •, 't I 'l ' That's. whc\t the, trial court, mo,B.?:~--

. <j wh~ i-t .~t•?,t~d t,hat tho_ ~~aims of. .the appellant, to the effec,t tl},.t_ justic,_ ' . . . ,_1-· • .. ~~ ~ <lone to her were :i;r ema tures. If \'le. allow 01,U'selv.es. ~-9. .P;la.Y 1:t+.9.ng : •• • ~ ,\. ,, • • • .. . •• 4; Yl_ith ·tha. ~ears of -t~-appcllant~ we shall find ourselves bein.g ~ngaged •·:· · . . ' . ' . in an .endless game, for th,~·-.R:esandent or . ;)ven the chHdren might col!-ie up= . ,I •• . '""1th. •un:l.Jar. objections~ . Nobody will bcnef::t fr'.x:1 t:12.: scenario. , 'l.1:'.1c ~~.- her arguments raised in this case will be bc,for0 t~1-:: }/t'O~):.;;:- forum ... :.. . 9 ~ i s e I .filr-d·nothing·unconst"'itutional in the appointnont of the O.f cour,~f~ ;I. must· m~ib,L_:mys0~f vor.1, ~lear?f' th.is particular, P<?int. • ~~ithst~ding .. w~at J;: ~ave _stated abovo/1 ~I· ain, n·ot oblivi"OUS'"of the f~ct • • J •. •,,;. • • •··. that. the appeltant _,.was nat-4:-'.'!ally shocl:cd·"nnd up.13et by ~ome':6f the declare,... ti~s.or. utt~rances, . .' . touching he~ p:n·so::.aJ.ly~ at ·t~c :61ai·;~eeting and l\enoe ,, :, hal" -otµ"rent f ~ Etnd.suspicion.s. I only w;n·-i) to assuie her t~t those. ' . . w~re '8fflI)ty rhetorics an~ a_.- relic, of the :;a st. J- They·. C~'1ot· supplant tha la\1; ·rt is always good.to have in.mind and be guided'by wlilit: ~ir Thomas I More, the great: just and. :.wise. Lord Chancellor of his ti::1e·~·· s~::d about . ~~}'

=·. ' . 11The WO:I'ld mu~t co11;5truo a_ocording to its wits .. This court mµ.st construe :3-ccord_ing ·_i;o the law., u •: · &,·· it llli 11 be in this case. ,· The law is very clear on the entitlements of the beneficiarfo,:, of the category of the a:ppellanto It is not as anachronistic as Mrs., Munuc, \vOuld like us to believe ,, it is. If, it is mt I want to assure her that , .'. if the need to construe it will arise, it shall be so oonstrued as to make ju.st ice to i:r evail for ..all •. i-robody includin2: t;1e ·appellant herself if she were to ·be appointed the administrn.trix s~:oJ.l be, allowed to circumvent i• er flout it with impunity~ As an administr::i.th.v.:. 'ct1.UJ api)ointed by the ~ , , . '• ... the Respondent ,~ha~ ~e guided by ·the ..rolcv""'::t )l'civailil1c :.aws of the la.nfl. in the administration and distribution of the dcccasodts e.stc:..tc and not by the wishes of the cian or any other bod~ of persons o Havin~ so observed, as the Resp ondcnt enjoys the trust and confidence of t h0 Ji:aj ori t:r of tht dependants er beneficiaries and all If the dcceased•s clan r,:cmbcrs. I hereby·«>nfirrn her appointment as the sole administratrix of the estate of the late Major Charles K. Mbwambo. I am confident that the 3.ppellant will give her the necessary co-operation so that this burden rome ta,:,k can be ' smoothly acoompiished without further truises in the

family, within tho framework of the lawo - 1 ,· ... '!I • 10 I have noted .in the judgement of the District Court that has eJ.r.~ady r~c~iv~~- T.Sh~.62_9,640/= from _the e:r.ployer of lv1r c'.cceased .. • .• .. '- •• : • . ••• • ; •. J •• : •'. • ·. . • ... . .) . ll.ueb~nd,_. .Unfortuna;t.~J.,y, there is no evidc·nce ort record to ru ::_:rport this •. ., .. ·· . . . · ·r. ·..-··:~·: -. ' .. : ; . . . . ·, :·~: ,:Jfl'·• If _this _is "true, anyway, I. would advise her to accou...'1t for the same t_o. -.,:,,:, •,.••• • • • • •n • •, • • ••• the appointments of the lower. q~ur~1:, D.1'3 :lear on this and the orders made 1 :: . .._... • ... r - . • . . .. .. · .. therein ~):loul5i, b~ fully ii.:ple:::0nter1: if t},at >.as not been done • ( . ·:.:. In f_ine_, !hi~. ~PP_~a1. ~,~ils.a How0v~:?."~ given the nature of the dispute • ·• -:-· ..: .. . : . ·,. • . ..l.:. ·. ~: . .. ; . • • . .. ~ . .. and in a spirit t~t will h~lp't~ pronot0 reconciliation in the family . . . ~ .·.:..··.,.!. I will order that each f0.rty benr her O\•:r: costs i,1 this court and the .it·· .. i,..:_ . • courts below. Delivered in ,. oour~ ,.in the presence of t!1e appellant. and. the Respondent this 23rd day of< February_, 2004 at Moshi. ... . E., M. K. -RUTAK:~W:HA, .. (_) .. . J1JTXI11-0NT • • •· ... ., : :...- 1• •• :.