ruckya sanatu basserporte vs treasury registrar and 2 others 2021 tzhc 7389 29 november 2021

ruckya sanatu basserporte vs treasury registrar and 2 others 2021 tzhc 7389 29 november 2021

The plaintiff did not acquire ownership as the sale was never concluded due to government policy change and lack of full payment; however, she is entitled to refund of her 10% deposit and compensation for non-performance, while the 2nd defendant is declared lawful owner. Defendants' counterclaim for rent/mesne profits fails for lack of proof.

Citation
ruckya sanatu basserporte vs treasury registrar and 2 others 2021 tzhc 7389 29 november 2021
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant: Ruckya Sanatu Basserporte; 1st Defendant/plaintiff: Treasury Registrar; 2nd Defendant/2nd Defendant: Center for Agriculture Mechanization and Rural Technology (CARMATEC); 3rd Defendant/3rd Defendant: The Attorney General
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
29 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's suit partly succeeds; defendants' counterclaim partly dismissed.
Legal Topics
Ownership of Land, Specific Performance, General Damages, Counterclaim for Rent, Government Policy Frustration, Tender Process, Compensation for Non Performance
Source Language
English
Land Law Contract Law Ownership of Land Specific Performance General Damages Counterclaim for Rent Government Policy Frustration Tender Process +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ruckya Sanatu Basserporte

Plaintiff/defendant

Treasury Registrar

1st Defendant/plaintiff

Center for Agriculture Mechanization and Rural Technology (CARMATEC)

2nd Defendant/2nd Defendant

The Attorney General

3rd Defendant/3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff purchased the property on Plot No. 108 Vijana Road with CT 11496 Arusha City
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was/is under statutory obligation to pay house rents in favour of the defendants
  3. 3 To what reliefs are the parties entitled

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff did not acquire ownership as the sale was never concluded due to government policy change and lack of full payment; however, she is entitled to refund of her 10% deposit and compensation for non-performance, while the 2nd defendant is declared lawful owner. Defendants' counterclaim for rent/mesne profits fails for lack of proof.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's suit partly succeeds; defendants' counterclaim partly dismissed.

Orders

  • Plaintiff entitled to refund of Tshs. 6,000,000 (10% bid price)
  • Defendants to pay compensation for non-performance of contract to the tune of Tshs. 50,000,000 to plaintiff