19921211 TZHC Dar es Salaam3
The marriage has irreparably broken down due to adultery, threats, failure to provide maintenance, and refusal of sexual intercourse; respondent is entitled to personal property acquired in her name.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19921211 TZHC Dar es Salaam3
- Parties
- Appellant: Mwamini Issa Massawe; Respondent: Salehe Mohamedi Kilungi
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 11 December 1992
- Procedural Posture
- Divorce Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Divorce, Matrimonial Property Division, Adultery, Maintenance
- 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
Mwamini Issa Massawe
Appellant
Salehe Mohamedi Kilungi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Divorce Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the marriage between the parties has irreparably broken down
- 2 Entitlement to matrimonial assets upon dissolution of marriage
Ratio Decidendi
The marriage has irreparably broken down due to adultery, threats, failure to provide maintenance, and refusal of sexual intercourse; respondent is entitled to personal property acquired in her name.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Respondent entitled to household properties acquired in her name
- Parties may apply for division of other alleged matrimonial assets
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
-- -~ -... \-\--\<L:, .. t,%n-\ . ~ IN THE HIGH CC:URT CiF '? ANZANIA AT DPR ES'S/\LAAM ... ..-.-.~-,;..•~•,.,..;,..,.....- ./ ve.:sus '' 'l'he tnani~ge betwE:en the J:,arties was d.issolved by the Primaw ;ourt at Kinonlloni in "Dar es S;1laam and an oraer fo~ ~1.vilton of ·: Mauimonial assets wa~ ~uly ma('e• The reapon,.ent appe~e", to"'~e fL,~ict eQUrt which -'ismisse.., the appeal. '11'\is is hi• a:ee-,a• ... • The appellan~, Mwamini Issa Massawe, who haA petitjon~" fo7· fivoree, tel"' t'~e primary court that the respon.,ent, "11S.n•hel\e " Moham~ Kilurig,, ha".comm!tte~ s0veral acts~of a"ultery thteaiene.., ,o Wl the resron-'ent~ an~ rafuse4 or faile.., tr) hat?e aexvai- j.nte,- fOU~se wl'.th the respon-Alent..,for many months., by aUi'eging.,that lie VII \<>; tifeA~ The appellant ~enie~ <Jil the allega{1o?f.e ma"e by the · ,e,pon~ent, There was, as the-' trial court f,,un;.e ~utt'ietent be1,ev1 1!.e ~y1Aeziee""to suppqz:t the .raspon~ent 1s evi Aence. P:w.2. Jafa.t f101am~~ gave eviAence thr.i~ he; founl'l his wife commi lting a~ultafv with tile oppellani on 16-Aµgust 1905. Jafari gave Ae~aile,. eviAence~abo~i f '1'\e: inc:iAent anA-the marriage between lilim' an;t his "'1,fe was "i••o"'e•· beeause of the aA~ltery. There was also eviAence by P.W.l.KJtwaaa. Salehe who is a t<ln-cells lea~er about J;lis ef,t'orts t:~ rec )ncil.e ftlle panies who ha,. :)(ien at loggerheaAs for a long-pe.ra.oA, EVi -"en,e , of thre,~ts by the appellant against the respon..sent. The z-espon.Aeat ~tways cornplaineA anA the matter was re~erreA to pollce ~reby the appellwt was eonvicte"' by the p,:imary court •. ., •l,J~ • -- "' Tr,e ,:.1::-:Pellant "enie,-1! all the alJegations of a ...ultery bu~ 1'e ta1" that ~ -c.omrt.c:t:.jpft -ror tru:&a~ng -the responA••• Wai ... •. /2 -, •. 2 ,orreet. Ho, however, sai<'1 that the resp:-1n -'ent ha., refuse., to • have sexual interc:::>urse 1vit1 him because the appellant is marr,e" to another wife. I think the evi Aence t 11t the marriage ha A broken J ·-wn • 1-'reparably was su.tfic!ent~ The· trial court believe" Ehe eviAenae by P.W.2 Jtif.J.ri Mohamerl tha :~'the appellant c.r,mmitte,. ~"'ultel'Y .. with Jafari•s wife. Thc:~ev· ;:cnce of threace against the respon,4e!1• . ~ by the M~gomeni Primary cour: of· threatening th~ respon"ent. ~ . on several occasions; an"' fer a long pe.r:io ... of time, was suppo,it• ... by the ten-cells leaAer 1 an"' thL, fact that the appellan" wa• #"lf.ffie"' He ,Wjl •entenc:eA to a fine of shsol:C0O/= which he pai ... in C•!.rninal caae '· No. 2525 of,.,1991. The respor -"ent was not safe in ... this maa mai-.riage, This coupleA with appellant•:;; ·cts of a ... ultery an A failu.i-e to provi"'e rnainte~foce, as well itS refusal t; have sexual !nterc:: 'une with the resporf'ent:~ are sufficient groun,.s which.., prove., tha t the 1 marriage has irreparably broke1 "'own. The attitu"e -:,f the pariie, 1:Q eaeh other at the hearing of this appeal is clear animoa1\llj t - agree with the""::~ower c:ou.rt.! that the marr~age betwee-n the p~rtiet tannot be save,.,, Thl-:, trial prim:::iry court properly "iss ,1ve,. the marriage. As regar"s ;natrimonial'"' assets, the res1Jon"'ent..,p;)"'utte,. fe,aejpM irt'the prima.Fy court as evi"'ence ·,:hat the h-,useh.-,l..- p»,pE!.rt:.1.e•, \,~e beA•• rnatres&es,, cupboar"s a· refrigerator an"' other small item, were ac:quire-4 in· 11er personal namt:., They are her persona'l p;-oper."~llf /\fJ Pt"OVi~e?f in S-C:-~tion 160 of the Law of Mar-riage Act, the ,eap~n,.ea, i• entitlei=I to th¢se'"'properties. The lowe.F courts p~~ly hel,. t:hst, 1:he responrlent sht?ul" take ~hose properties. If there are a'ny other I p,operties which ,~re allege~ to be ua ~rimoni al •as sate, an" whieh the I pa.ties., thi.Qk_. . , th~:t! ~-'¥ -OU,Sht to be .. lstr1wte--' between any one of . j ibe parties has th<? right to file all application for ~ivision c,f . I _--t~ properties.. 1 'I . . ~ This appeal iJ, f.or the re-a.sons. giV6fl; .... ismie.&e..., wit.I\ ' 4oet•• W .,J. MAINA ' Jl'JT}GE Ai Dar es Salaam If ~ecember, 1992 J.ppellant present ~c.lent p.re&ent. I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS THE TRUE copy OF THE ORIGINAL DErUTY REGISTRAR j •