ndamije nzabonimanaadmistrator of the estate of the late nzabonimana clavery vs justinian azari and three others 2021 tzhc 5436 30 july 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT TANZANIA BUKOBA DISTRICT REGISTRY AT BUKOBA LAND APPEAL NO. 37 OF 2020 NDAMIJE NZABONIMANA (Administrator of Estate of the late Nzobonimana clavery)........................ APPELLANT VERSUS JUSTINIAN AZARI....................................................^RESPONDENT KAJUGA AZARI......................................................... 2nd RESPONDENT KAMNONO AZARI.....................................................3rd RESPONDENT FAKULETA NGELAGEZE.......... ..................................4th RESPONDENT (Appeal from the decision of the District Land and Housing Tribunal at Bukoba in Application No. 143 of 2012) JUDGMENT 19 & 30 July, 2021 MGETTA, J. In this appeal, the appellant Ndamije Nzabonimana (an administrator of the estate of the late Nzabonimana Clavery) is appealing against the decision delivered on 20/3/2020 by the District Land and Housing Tribunal at Bukoba (henceforth the trial tribunal) complaining in his memorandum of appeal that: 1. The trial tribunal erred in law and in fact in deciding the case without considering that the two acres were part of fifteen acres that, were owned by his deceased father. i 2. The trial tribunal erred in law and in fact in deciding the matter without visiting the locus in quo and against the weight of evidence. At the hearing of the appeal, the appellant appeared in person and fended for himself, unrepresented; while, the Mr. Frank Kalory John, the learned advocate appeared and represented four respondents namely Justinian Azari, Kajugo Azari, Kamnono Azari and Fakuleta Ngelageze. The appellant submitted generally that the deceased father owned 15 acres of land situates at Luhanya, Village Chanika Ward Karagwe. Out of 15 acres he was occupying 2 acres. The rest were used for cultivation. In his submission, Mr. Frank stated that, the trial tribunal did decide the case basing on the evidence tendered before it; and not basing on (PC) Civil Appeal No. 86 of 1981, the case which was handed down by the High Court in Mwanza. The parties were the appellant's father (the deceased) and the late father of the respondents. The High Court decision was that the appellant's father came to Tanzania as refugee and was given two acres of land, which two acres the respondents did not dispute. The respondent's father was in the year 1972 given 15 acres by the village leadership and the appellant's father, 2 acres. The appellant is still 2 occupying on the two acres left by his deceased father. On this issue, the trial tribunal directed itself well on the evidence tendered before it. On the question of visiting locus in quo, I agree with the submission of Mr. Frank that it was the trial tribunal's discretion to visit the land in dispute or not. The appellant misconceived himself on this issue. I find it without merit. There are sufficient evidence which the trial tribunal analyzed and finally correctly decided the case in favour of the appellants. I don't have valid reasons upon which I should reverse the trial tribunal's decision. In the event, the decision of the trial tribunal is upheld. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs. MGETTA // 30/7/2021 COURT: This judgment is delivered today this 30th July, 2021 in the presence of the appellant in person and in the presence of Mr. Frank Kalory John, the learned advocate for the all respondent. 3 • J. S. MGETTA 7 /•:. -/ Ws JUDGE ; I 30/7/2021 «. I' ’•_ ?< L4'sf'\‘ \ ? if COURT: 'Right of appeal to the Court of Appeal is fully explained. - ______ S. MGETTA U judge f;7 MW'S 30/7/2021