19940920 TZHC Dodoma

- ...... -- f D? 'ffiill IIIGB COURT OF TANZA.1'li A'£~l>,QP..~!! (PC) CIVIL .t..PPF.AL NO. 42 OF 1994 (Fro1:1 the c.ocision of Dist:i.~ict Court of Kondoa at Kond.oa. · in Civil Appeal No.100 of 1992 R.AM.ilDIIA'NI I. D:mNTJ... • o eo o aAPPELLll.NT Vro:sus

JUDGMENT 'Jhe appellant Ramadl1m1i I. J3enta lost in the suit he filled at Kondoa Urban =2:;:-jJ;1o;t>y Court, 1-ib.ore ho clcilned t1:u~e0 "bags of f'inccrmillot ( u1ezi) f'rom tho- ~ospondGnt Rashicli s/o Saidi. Tho r0sr--ond0nt succeodod in his comitor-claim of 20 _bags of fin:,;o.r-raillct a.ea.inst tho a:p:pollant 0 That decision we,s ondasod by the Kondoa District Court. How tho appnJ, ,,..,..,. has appealed to this court chcllenGinc:; tho decisions of the two coUL~ts below. Tho fppellant had told tho· trial cou:rt that sometime in Septemborj 1991 b.o cave tho respondent shs. 100,000/= so that tho said ; respondent could :buy bira sooc 22 b2,BB of fingormillot. Tho rospond.ont it is said was asked to buy oa.1h 1>2,t;· of fingermillct · at shs~4,500/=• It is said tho transo.ction of handing ovro: tho money ti tho respondent was witnessed by 1110 appellant•·s sonlb:- 0 Mohamed s/o Ramndl1ani (PW.2), It is said in October, 1991 tho a:2polla.nt went. to take the ba.cs of fil'lf.;'ermillot and ,1-m.,s civan only 19 kvss of finger:millct. A ·wi tnoss Ii'.f:i:- • JUIDa. s/o Marusu (PW.3) confirmoi ti.1t,,t. only 19 bags wore td~. So tho appellant su.bni ttod that tho -trial oom•t end District Court Wol'c wrong to deny l:d.m J.:ds throe be-cs of' fj_j,1c;err.iillot. Tho appolle..nt further clairaod that the :counter-claim of 20 bnc,·s of fingormiloet ues a oonooction to p0rV0t

tho coili•so of justice •. On i:is 1x-.t·t tJ:..o :;:,0s:;_,ontLl1t t0ld tho tricl 001.D:'t' th,:,t it "-.. ~'..,d;o ::::itfr~ l~- tl:.e ,·.)poJ.l.'.'x.t_ ~-,,a_ :·,:;:·eccl to 1:u;y 20 1-,r✓~;s o:f fi.ll(,or- nillot L·or.1 m:., ?,. 1mt tb.o s::-.id fj_n- .-::D:":.--.:~llot ,r2.s not r[',cl:scl :.11 ~:~.:.::.::- ~ w.s l)ut ·:ms j1.~r.;t on t~'.·.o f)oo1··• L.s r:, .::::."'::::J.l:::21t m::.ntod. to i~·.-:.::, c.io.toly t.'.-;.:c 0 I,,. 2 th~ ones of finccrm.J.lot in his lo:c:ry to 1.rusha and as DW.2 h2.d. no 0t1pty cuney b2.gs I it was docidod ci thor to tor:i~ow onpty [,,1.;1nny 'ba:3s f'rou respondent o-i: bcnTow tho 20 le.gs of fingarnillot :i:ror.i tho rospondont. When respondent was oontactod ho told thon th8.t he hrr.d no onpty (;1.llley llD.[;Sj however he ~ood to lond 2,:ppollant his 20 1)2.£.;'S of f'i.nr;crr:dllot so lomc c.s apj_)ola.nt would replace those 20 bags of f'inc;OI';:illot as soon as the rot-o.rncd f'ron -Al"Usha. Tl1at ai•rangonont was C/",3i.'ood 1Jy nllo 1.nd that a:i.Tanc;cr:10nt and ~c1..~ocnont was 1d. tnossod 'by the 2,l)pollant' s turn1]oy 1Y½:,, Uoi·i o/o Ilar.rn.dhani (DW. 4) as well c:i.S a third pc.rt;v ono Hr. Iddi s/o Rencifr.c2,ni (DW.3). Tho 20 02,f;S of finc;crtiillct wore pe.ckoc1. in tho c::.ppoll211t 1 s lor-..i:'y ir1 tho prosonc·· of t..110 1·cspcnd.ont ::1s· well as bis 1fi'C:d.1ossos DN'.2, DN'.3 e.nd DW.4. Tho ros11ondont followed

uo tho r.1attor ii.1 tho followi:ne r:.1onths, but a;_ppoll2nt just prortlscd to rovlacc the, 20 lJ2,es of fincor□illot ho h2il. te:kono And D1-Te2 tostifiod the,t ho was surp:L. . isod c.s to 1-ib.y tho appoll2.D.t did not go to tako tho 20 tc:gs so th2.t ho 001.;iJ.o_ ·p:,Jf tho rosl)ondont. ~:i.o :ros,IJonclont so.id tho.t ho was au:t'pl'isod when in J...w-,i.1st, 1992 ho was suod at tho Primart Court by tho said appellant, In ny juclc):lcnt, I do find that this case dopondod on tho L12~ttcr of crcdibili ty of tho wi tnossoso T!-:is c01..1.rt t.c~s oitC:11 onp}1n.sizod that on the natter of c:rodibility of tho witnesses, tho trir.1 court is 1)ottor si tu..':'.tod to asses tho ser.10, - .An 2.]:Jpollato ooU!:'t will not intorfo.1. . 0 id. th a findil'l/3' of n tricJ. court on tho ne,ttor of crodibili ty o:f 1'11. tnoss unless tho decision is nanif'ostly unrocsorn::;)lo - sco Dc.udi Mwcl:>~lo Vx·s. _~l:m Hw,_,1r,,,~ , ~ - .la& . ( 19~7). H.C.De n. 59• In tho co.so c.t hMd tho :r-csr)ondont was cr.iply corrobol'r,tod by tlu-oo ~'ldcr>c_1~91::.j;....1.d. tnossos Dl1. 2, D1f.,5 2.nl nw.

4. While the U.l)j_JOllant W?,S m.tp110rtocl only 7:;y his son P1-T.2 as ro()~rds tho p~ont of slls, 100, ooo/=• vnu.l.o tho other appellant's 1-d. tnoss Pl'T• 3 norcly stated thi:·,t ho smr 19 1:::acs of f'inc;0i·Lullct boing pc,c;l-cod in tho appcllro1t•s lorry fron tho :.cospci1clo1it rs hone. I en not pcrsuacl0cl that tho rospond.ont end his tbroo wi tno3s C-'.)ulcl h2,vc concoc;tod tLo story o:f o.:ppolle.nt ·he.vine borrowed 20 12,gs of :finc;ornillot fron tho ;;.:•os:poniont 0 It is ·,~ view i;l,;.c..t l)oth cow:-ts l,,lou 1r.::;rc co::.?oot ~.t tl.10 conclusion tL03~ rc2.chod 0 • .1. 1.... ' J i:.1 not collcctinc filinc fees fc:;• t:. ~u :· ,--~,,. .L -,-.._-: 7_ ;_...,i-~i . ·--- ·- --·•--·-~--- - i11t·'0!"'-,.;11· .--- ~.i.i... ._,_ o·t '·rn" "''1 1· rc~n,, ~,-,1.· +,- ~c.:.,,.:;, ~ .. ~l->L--'...J.c...L vc/O I ( (, f C' ' ~ 3 Tho said Prir.1e.ry· 001.'!rt is hcrel]y c1.:L::.~ootocl to collect filinu foes :l:'ron tho rcspondo1'!.t for tJ.10 oountor-cle:in., In the event tho 2-rpecl f2ils 2nd it is J..,_o:eol)y clisuisod 1iith costs. Orclor o,ooo:;:•clil1cly. (J .L. Mi-!1.LUS.ANYt.. ) JlJDGE 20/9/1994 .Q.~1.-p:-!t JudQ:.10nt dclbrered in oh2Jibors 2,t Dodor.m in tho prosonco of i;h-1 rosi;>onc..cnt 1,'Ut in tho atsonoo of tho ai,pc?lii.nt. .... -- ,TL,'!J)QE 20/9/1994 I corti!Jr that this is a .t:L"UO oopy of tho orig-incl • ., (s.n. L~~H0 DIS'.IfilCT .. · . . ~~~ t0/l)tt9.95.