19891222 TZHC Dar es Salaam
There was no evidence to support the appellant's claim that the money was won in a lottery; the money was found to be jointly earned from the bar businesses and should be divided equally between the parties.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19891222 TZHC Dar es Salaam
- Parties
- Appellant: Mwajuma Omari; Respondent: Saidi Lithumani
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 22 December 1989
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Division of Matrimonial Property, Appeal Procedure
- 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
Mwajuma Omari
Appellant
Saidi Lithumani
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sum of shs.32,000/- in the bank account was matrimonial property to be divided between the parties
- 2 Whether the appellant's claim that the money was won in a lottery was supported by evidence
Ratio Decidendi
There was no evidence to support the appellant's claim that the money was won in a lottery; the money was found to be jointly earned from the bar businesses and should be divided equally between the parties.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appellant to pay costs of the appeal and those in the two courts below
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
C ... IN TTIE IlIGII COUilT OJ.:'°·TL.UZlJUA 1.tr DlJ.l. ES S,:\I.i/~ · .(PC) Ml.!.L1IlIMCiiI.lJ., CIV;tL JJ'PFJ.L HO., 10 Cl,ii ~0· \ : ,? ~~ (F.ro:-.1 ori{Jincl. tho decision of tho J3istriot Court o£'~iJfl. £tt U''boto in Civil Appccl rTo,l0/87) .. MW.lJ11Ul. Ol-JfJ;.I ••• ~ ••• 0 G " . . . ·• • • • • • " • • " • 0 f! 0 • • • • • II . . . Cl • 6 • • •• • • • 0 • • • • • .APPELLAii!T ' • I ' ' ·vo:rsus 5.li.IDI :..TD.uI·,It..WI. • • • •,, • •,, • •., •. ~,..;,, •. •. •. o o. • •• • , .. , .•. • • • • • • ~ •.•. • .~OllDENT --- J""tJDGME!:TT !JIINDO, J t tho ,J,....,r.. Utotc Dis"iirlot,.,. Tho question of c1ivisio11. of u·,;1;:J..,,i:1om.:i.J. assets ( two bars ['.tl.(1. sJ.1s.32,·ooo/- in ['., 1Jc'l'.l.k o.ooount) was not rcr.:iolvccl to tho sntisfo..c·Uon of tho hus1Jc.nc1. r:c 2.,ppoclccl [V.;'ci.11.St t~.10 dco:ts:i..on cf: Prinm,y Court o;.1 this point to tb.o District ,Court of Utctoe Thero the .Jlfucistrr,,,to i11c1ion;t(rn in his juc1£,·nont th2.t tho 1x·.rtios C'.u"Tood to diVido between thon t;.i-o two lJ<'.l's, cc.eh -~c ha:t·:- ,_,..,~., ::.!"' ~•o,:~r:J:"cls tho shs.32,oooi- in a bcJ1"l1:;: o..coov.;ni, he clooi1.:ccl t]::.::-,t out ·of this .:-no'Ultt 4000/- ·be gi.von to. oaoh of tho four children of tho nc.xrioeo encl r.-.,s ·thoy woro still young thei:r rcspootive mounts should. be 1Jcnlcod., Tb.G to-'i;o.J. of these suns would bo 16,oob/-:c · TI.Jis woulcl lon.vo n. hclro.100 of sl•.JJ~lG,ooo/-. Tho loe.Tncd Mneistr<>to c1.irootocl tJmt .this sun should 1x, sh'l.t'ocl out oqualzy botwoQll tho parties so t;~o.;t GD.Ch shouJ.cl 5ot shs"'G 9000/ 0 ~. Tho 1dfo, ra:-rajuna Or:ml'i, was ne£1Tiovcd by ·l:ihis decision nnc: !le,S a,ppoclcc1. to this oourt c.1Gci.°flst it. While t:'.:..o husbnncl, Snidi. Li.thu::icni( th0 rospcm.C:ont) oontonc1s that tho shs.32,000/-:- woro o~ing f'ron tho b['J'; 1:iusincssoa ::u1c~ should bo sha.rad otit oquaJ.:cy- _botwoon hi□ "I.!r1 i;lc.c .--..:~:~olloxrt:1 tl:.o c:,i,cllc.nt lms contondod th:row;hout tl:u-;t th::i,t noncy wc:,s 0~1od solc1y tJ::rouch her· o-wn efforts, sho sn.id sho won c.. lottory ancl w~.s pdc.l th::.,t nonay. 111::-.c lac'.l:llcd District Mn0 istrn:to J.1.0wcvcr, found th0t there w;:•,s no ovicl01100 supportinG the contentions of tho ;:-,p1,ollc.nt th~t she won the 32 1 000/- :L."'l e, lottery and c1isuissod her olnios on t:lis point,, I c'.IJ of tho view the:~ tI:a lcr..rnod oc,cist1'a.to .ri 0 ht]y c.isnissGd appellant ts claios thr.:'i; sl:o won the nonoy :i.11 o. lottGry• Thero is si□ply no crvirlouoo to support this, n.p~ f'ron h.ppollr.nt' s own "!:l&"o p,ssortionse, Saconc'J;v', -~J:o loDJ.'llocl Dis-'i;riot Mty;istrc.to holcl thr..t tho . noncy hnrl . 1JoGn onrned fron ·tb.o ba.r bus:inossGs jointly by tho po.rtios 2..s oontonclocl by· th.a rcsponc".ont. I :finc1. thc.t I Cl'lmoi; f[',tu.~. this holcti.l)C of tho n~ist1'ato. This being tho oc.so I will not also cli.s:rurb the rinimor tho s1lse32,0(!J/- W'[l,S cq.vidocl up by·bin~ I_ think tho.t cliYision·is sGnaiblo nnd I uphold it hero• 2 - In tho result, the 0i;;.,or.l by th0 _~ppc;?ll.ttt !..ttmjur:ia (brrl to this Court is disnisscd in its entirety. As sl:-o is :runninc' ono o:f the b2r 1)us:i.l1esaes now, she h2.,s the r.1crns to pey costs o.11cl sho will 1)o~ Jliho costs of this .:-,ppocl c.ru.l thoso in tho two oourts 1Jolow:. Apponl clisnissoa.. Arr~ ( L•• ~ ...~.~cr.i:Umc) .rtr:GE 22nd Dooonbor, 1909. For tho n,ppcllant - P:rts0nt in person ff