saada osman vs prema sarah lalji others 2023 tzca 17790 3 november 2023

saada osman vs prema sarah lalji others 2023 tzca 17790 3 november 2023

The appellant's suit was premised on trust property and allegations of fraud, thus not time barred under section 18 of the Law of Limitation Act. The power of attorney was validly executed and registered, conferring general powers to the 1st respondent. The appellant was aware of and ratified the transfers by conduct. The 2nd-11th respondents are lawful owners of the disputed property. The affidavit of DW8 was defective and struck out, but its exclusion does not affect the outcome.

Citation
saada osman vs prema sarah lalji others 2023 tzca 17790 3 november 2023
Parties
Appellant: Saada Osman; 1st Respondent: Prema Sarah Laui; 2nd Respondent: Karim Diamond Ramzanali Jiwa Rajan; 3rd Respondent: Zubeda Diamond Ramzanali Jiwa Rajan; 4th Respondent: Mohamed Shabirahmed Ibrahim; 5th Respondent: Yasin Abdulkader Ibrahim; 6th Respondent: Shabirahmed Ibrahim; 7th Respondent: Nasima Abdul Majeed; 8th Respondent: Ketan Mukundlal Khakhar; 9th Respondent: Gulamhussein Kermali; 10th Respondent: Shyrose Gulamhussein Kermali; 11th Respondent: SILMI Limited
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
3 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Power of Attorney, Trust Property, Limitation of Actions, Transfer of Land, Registration of Documents, Fraud Allegations
Source Language
English
Property Law Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Power of Attorney Trust Property Limitation of Actions Transfer of Land Registration of Documents +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Saada Osman

Appellant

Prema Sarah Laui

1st Respondent

Karim Diamond Ramzanali Jiwa Rajan

2nd Respondent

Zubeda Diamond Ramzanali Jiwa Rajan

3rd Respondent

Mohamed Shabirahmed Ibrahim

4th Respondent

Yasin Abdulkader Ibrahim

5th Respondent

Shabirahmed Ibrahim

6th Respondent

Nasima Abdul Majeed

7th Respondent

Ketan Mukundlal Khakhar

8th Respondent

Gulamhussein Kermali

9th Respondent

Shyrose Gulamhussein Kermali

10th Respondent

SILMI Limited

11th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st respondent acted lawfully under the power of attorney in partitioning and transferring the disputed property
  2. 2 Whether the partitioning and transfer of the disputed property to the 2nd-11th respondents was lawful
  3. 3 Whether the appellant authorized the 1st respondent to dispose of the disputed property

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's suit was premised on trust property and allegations of fraud, thus not time barred under section 18 of the Law of Limitation Act. The power of attorney was validly executed and registered, conferring general powers to the 1st respondent. The appellant was aware of and ratified the transfers by conduct. The 2nd-11th respondents are lawful owners of the disputed property. The affidavit of DW8 was defective and struck out, but its exclusion does not affect the outcome.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • 2nd-11th respondents declared lawful owners of the disputed property
  • Affidavit of DW8 struck out as defective