N
- Citation
- N
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 1 January 1971
- Posture
- Civil Appeal / Second Appeal
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 1 January 1971
- Posture
- Civil Appeal / Second Appeal
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The trial court was correct in finding for the respondent based on the evidence that the items were given to her at marriage and not taken after dissolution, and the appellant failed to provide evidence to the contrary.
Court disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs fixed at shs. 60/-
02
Material facts
Parties
MOHAMED S/O ROMAYI
Appellant/plaintiffMWANAHAMISI D/O SAIDI
Respondent/defendantAmounts and remedies
- Value of Household Effects Awarded: TZS 393.25
- Costs Awarded: TZS 60
03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the respondent is entitled to the return of household effects after dissolution of marriage
- 02
Whether the trial court erred in awarding the value of the items to the respondent
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The appellant denied that any of the household items claimed by the respondent were received into the household and challenged the trial court's decision to order their return or payment of their value.
- Respondent
- The respondent argued that the items were given to her by her mother and relatives at the time of marriage according to Islamic Law, and that she was entitled to their return after the dissolution of marriage.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Islamic Law, as referenced in the judgment
Under Islamic Law, items given to a bride by her relatives at marriage are her property and should be returned to her upon dissolution of marriage if not already taken by her.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The trial court was correct in finding for the respondent based on the evidence that the items were given to her at marriage and not taken after dissolution, and the appellant failed to provide evidence to the contrary.
Court disposition
appeal dismissed
- Appeal dismissed with costs fixed at shs. 60/-
Source and reliance status
TZHC · 1 January 1971
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TZHC
Judgment· 1 January 1971
cQ A,--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT ARUSHA (PC) CIVIL APPEAL NO0 163 OF 1973 (From the decision of the District Court of HANAN 4 0 at BAI31;".TI in Civil Appeal No0 34 of 1973) MOHAMeD s/0 ROMAYI ----------------------- APPELLANVPLAINTIFF versus MWANAHAMISI S/0 3AID ----------------------- - RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT Jonathan, S. I see' no merit at' all in this second a ppeal brought by MOHAMED ROMAYI, In 1966 he mrried MWANAHANISI D/O SAIDI according to Islamic Law. In 1971 or thereabout the marriage was dissolved. MWANAHANISI then filed the 'present proceedings to get h r household effects returned to her. The trial court gave her judgement ordering MOHAMED to return the items she had listed 1 to the value of shs. 786/50. He unsuccessfully appealed to the District Court. However, the court reduced the award in that, in théeverit of the things not being made available to MWAHAHAMISI he should pay her only one baif of their value, namely, shs. 393/25. He now appeals to this court. There was considerable evidence that, upon WJANAHAMISI getting married to the appellant her mother and other relatives bought a great number of things and presented them to her, apparently to give her a start in her new home,. this according to Moslem Law. The marriage having.been dissolved she filed the proceedings to get those things returned to her. It would appear that according to Law she would be entitled to them if infect they had received them from her relatives and she had not taken them with her following the break—up Of the marriage. The appellant in his evidence flatly denied any of those things having been received into the household. He would call no evidence to bear out such denial. The trial court on the evidence before it had no difficulty in finding for the respondent. With this it is impossiele to disagree and in my view the present appeal ought not to h'ovt been brought. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs, which I fix at shs. 60/—. P.M.JONATHAN,
J U D G E PMJ/Umathi
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.