19981022 TZHC Dar es Salaam2
- Citation
- 19981022 TZHC Dar es Salaam2
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 22 October 1998
- Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal / Ruling on Leave to Appeal
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 22 October 1998
- Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal / Ruling on Leave to Appeal
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
No point of law exists for certification; the issue is purely factual regarding applicant's use of land as tenant at will.
Court disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- application dismissed with costs
02
Material facts
Parties
Silas L. Jinja
ApplicantHalfani S. Omari
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Year of Continuous Use Claimed: 1,964
- Year Applicant Allowed as Tenant at Will: 1,990
03
Procedural history
Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Ruling on Leave to Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether there is a point of law to be certified for appeal to the highest court
- 02
Whether limitation of actions applies to continuous use of land
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Applicant claims continuous use of the suit land since 1964 and raises limitation of actions as a point of law.
- Respondent
- Respondent's counter affidavit and prior findings establish applicant's use as tenant at will since 1990, not raising any point of law.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Court's inherent jurisdiction
Certification for leave to appeal requires a sufficiently strong point of law.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
No point of law exists for certification; the issue is purely factual regarding applicant's use of land as tenant at will.
Court disposition
application dismissed
- application dismissed with costs
Source and reliance status
TZHC · 22 October 1998
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· 22 October 1998
I (DAR ES SA!AAH DISTRICT HFGL3TRY) J.\.T D!~f{ J.iiS SAllu\~1 • ...........,.,. ...... ~1---..-- . . '?..-.~-.-...--- . , I ,SlvLA.I L }I].';?{£.{i~LA. • o " o o •· o ~ o t e ') " o :, • o .:, " .s o ~ c. ci o o o o o • o c:, 1 • ,, o • oJ\}1PELJ.J\.l'JT nAl'L/.\.DF.ANI SFOMARI O • 0 0 O O O O ♦ ~ 0 O O O • < • G O o O O ~ o ~ O O U O o o O O .m~SJ?ONDJ~NT
RULING ------------- --------·-·--·-- \ 'l'he. applicant fe.,;,.turefl a,s th(o defendr.t:;1..t at his trial in a _suit that the respo- ndent insti tr:ted ot tlJ.,j Moroi~r~_ Urban J?rimr.ry Co1.,rt for recovc,ry of n piece .of land. 'l1he trir-11 court found for the lJl.'.lintiff. 'I'he defondr=,_r,t appelcd;. he succe- c'~.d in the app0al to the District Court. In n fu.rthe:r appeal to this C0urt the ." decision of the District Court wn.s ,set :::dde n:n.d tl1ot of t!.~~ tri21.l 1-1rimt.r:/ cour·t vns- restored. 1'h<~ e.p;,licm:t no\·: sG:d-cs le.?ve of this Court to file an appeal before the highest court of the land. The chamber summons does not indic~.te tz;,) nc~ture of th2 points cf law or points of mixed lc-.w and fact, this being a third D.p1x,D.l~ In his e.fi'idavit the applfo1:;rit simply_ says that r,oint1J of l.:,1--r Dre involved :i.11 -th; intcmcled appe2.l. It is in his Hritten ~.rgum6nts ti1D.t. the, applic,:mt brings ur, the issue of limitaticn of ,~_ctions4 Ee contr.mds that he hus be-':D in continous Us(:: of tbc suit Lmd since 1964. The.t contG:ntion .i,2,s dismissed by tlrn tr'icl court which f,_ound o.s f2ct th:::t ,""",. t~c ap})lic~u1t was allowed t::; uso t.b.e land c-:,s ;:i, ten,?-..Ylt et :.d.11 in 1990.. Th2t finding W,lS uph::,ld by this court. .';:h~t finding does not, in ::my case, involve a point of 12,.w; · it is pureby one of facto In my judgm,mt, o.nd after- h[tVing t0u<::cn due account of the rcspond.-.::nt's cou..r1ter .;,( ... .J.. l,-' nff1.'c1,..,y4.1. ,:·.l - there is no point of law thr.~t I may certify t'o be sufficiently strong to 'I'he applic::,tion is dismit;sed l•:i.th c01:-;ts. Delivered. , 22/10/1998 In person For A:pplic:mt l Ab.sent - : For Re:;spondi,nt . J..J, ! I J i
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.