19700428 TZHC Mwanza4
Appellant failed to prove he had no sexual intercourse with the respondent; therefore, he is deemed the father of both children and liable for maintenance.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19700428 TZHC Mwanza4
- Parties
- Appellant: Saidi Hassani; Respondent: Bi. Zulia Kagilwa
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 28 April 1970
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Maintenance of Children, Paternity, Burden of Proof
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Saidi Hassani
Appellant
Bi. Zulia Kagilwa
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is the father of the two children
- 2 Whether the appellant discharged the burden of proof to deny paternity
Ratio Decidendi
Appellant failed to prove he had no sexual intercourse with the respondent; therefore, he is deemed the father of both children and liable for maintenance.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Judgment of District Court upheld
- Children to remain with respondent until each attains age of 5 years
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
j i,tsZ,q IN THL HIGH COURT OF TAiZANIA (In the District Registry.) AT KWANZA. APPE1LATk JURISDICTION. (nc) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 23 OF 1970- - (From the decision of the DistrictCourt of Bukoba District at Buko in Civil Appeal No0 59 of 1969. Original Karabagaine Civil Case No.13 of 1968.) SAIDI HASSANI. . . . . . . . . . • • • . . APPELLANT(Original Defendant j vs. BI. ZiULIA KAGILWA. . . . . . . . . . . . . .RhSPONDiiNT(Origi.nal Plaintill.) JUDGMENT. SEATON, J. This was an appeal from the juugment of the District'Court ina' claim for maintenance of two children of whom the appellant was said to be the father. The District Court upheld the judgment of the lower court in its decision that the elder child belonged to the appellant but differed from the primary court insofar as the District Court held that the second child also belonged to the appellant. The District Court went on to order that the children should remain with the mother, the respondent until each of them has attained the age of 5 years. The law on this matter is to be found in Government Notice No.279 of 1963 of which section 183 is very clear. It provides that the man whom a woman names to be the father of her illegitimate child may not deny paternity unless he can prove that he had no sexual intercourse with her. The law was correctly applied by the di:strict magistrate although it has been ignored by the primary court. As the appellant did not discharge the burden of proving that he had never had intercourse with the respondent, the claim of the respondent was entitle1 to succeed. I uphold the judgment of the District Court. The appeal is dismissed. The respondent is to have her costs in this Court which are assessed at shs.32/—. Delivered in Court the 28th day of April, 1970. (2hbY JUDGE 28.4. 70.