19951027 TZHC Dar es Salaam2
The respondent established a more credible claim to the disputed land through allocation by village authorities, and the appellant failed to substantiate his claim of purchase and ownership.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19951027 TZHC Dar es Salaam2
- Parties
- Appellant: Selamani Masudi; Respondent: Mkokoli Mkokola
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 27 October 1995
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Second Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Land Ownership, Unregistered Land, Allocation by Village Authorities
- 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
Selamani Masudi
Appellant
Mkokoli Mkokola
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is the rightful owner of the disputed unregistered land
- 2 Whether the respondent lawfully acquired the land through allocation by village authorities
Ratio Decidendi
The respondent established a more credible claim to the disputed land through allocation by village authorities, and the appellant failed to substantiate his claim of purchase and ownership.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Appellant to pay costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA l:.'I }lfJLES __s_AL_AAM_ (1 . C.) ClV:t:r.J .Af-'? EAL HO. ~9/199, (lROM- ~HE me:/:·tJ~QF ~~a ns::; ntstR.?eT . doURT or tE?JiE:<.E AT • . :,.,IyIL /~P:e.AL NO .10/94) SELa"ANI - MASUDI. • • • • • • JJ.7i' iU,ANt VQrsua ... _ MKOKOL.l MKOKOLA ••• • • • RES? ONDENT , JS.XANJl,);aJ. L ' .. 1 -~-- 'i'n1a ls a second appeal in a aatter originatinf trom the · - Primary Court ac Mt>agala, 'l'e111etce Dittrict, Dar es Salaam. · _ the appellant 1n•tiwted a ,uit ,here elaiming that he was the rtghiful owq.e~ ot an unrJgi~!ercd piece ot land o• thamba measuring about ¼ot ~ acx-~ and that tne reaponden\ had un• lawfully ente:ret ~oii _'1-lli land elaim~t: tp be kie, He iaid · he bought the 111\d troin one: Mt.liki (-ew .2) in 1990 tor SM, .0,000/•• He aa,d h~ theft st~.r~1.,ed developi,ng it and was lawer · surprised to se.:: the respot\d~t claiming to be tbe owner of 1 tt P,w.2 supported hie in l\i.s tlaims, but the Primary Court did not teel that he had aubatptiated those ~+aima. lt dismissed th@ suit btrt th.i: appellant was aggr~~v,c1.. He appealed ~ the Pi,strS.e t Court t>l Te:nelce but tilere too he -,,a, un,ueee- aatu1. l o ~ d.-ted, he now appeals to tilia ooux-t. Tbe rosponde~t•1 case was that he acquired tho euit land· p l9Sa \)y kin& allocated w1th it by village authol'.ltiea. }q,s witl\e11e1, Salum Saidi (D.W .2) and. AbdallahamM!. Jtuaa (DtWe3) ~ortecl him in that elailll arid said P ,w,a had no land .,. at ;he area where the land in dispute is to sell to tho I appellant; they said his land•. was els~whcre, away trcm the land ~ dispute. . lhe two r~t• belcw acc~-pted the r l\,:~Ji)Onctent• I <mtJeaUono as _ :rue an_~, aa sh~w, . lisr1~i.;secl th\; n:,ypcJ.J.r:nt' s eaaa. = 2 • After exai111\11'g the evidence oa record closely •J•elt, 1 do not. •.•· !.ind that they erred in doing so 1 The riespondeat eatablt•had a more credible claim to the sh~ba than the appellant and the appellant's. suit and appeal were rightly dismi~aed. i do here, too, thez-.fore 41smifa ••fitb cos.ts, til¢ appeal ke ha1 l)rousnt ;o ~s court. DAR ES SALAAM. ______ ,.,_, ...... 27/10/9,. For the appellaat - tn person For tbe respon4ent- in per$on. Jud&rlmt delivered. "-- f •