Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The appeal was allowed because the Respondent's claim was time-barred, having been filed more than twelve years after the cause of action arose, and because the Tribunal erred in granting reliefs affecting land title and survey without joining the Commissioner for Lands and Registrar of Titles as necessary parties.
Source excerpt
The suit is incompetent for failure to join the Director of Survey and Mapping, Commissioner for Lands, and Registrar of Titles as necessary parties, as the reliefs sought directly involve their statutory functions.
Source excerpt
Failure to join the Commissioner for Lands and Registrar of Titles in a dispute over registered land is fatal and renders the suit unmaintainable; additionally, failure to attach proof of service of the mandatory 90 days’ notice to the government in the plaint violates section 6(2) of the Government Proceedings Act and Order VI Rule 14(1) of the Civil Procedure Code. Both defects are incurable and require the suit to be struck out.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal quashed High Court proceedings and judgment in a land dispute because necessary parties were not joined, and ordered a retrial.
The respondent's evidence was at serious variance with her pleadings, constituting a fundamental irregularity that vitiated the proceedings; thus, the trial tribunal's proceedings, judgment, and decree are quashed and set aside.
Source excerpt
The absence of necessary parties (the sellers and the municipal council) in the original proceedings rendered the Trial Tribunal's judgment and orders null and void, as the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to effectively determine the dispute.
Source excerpt
Illegality arising from non-joinder of necessary parties is sufficient to grant extension of time for revision, overriding strict requirement to account for each day of delay.
Source excerpt
The absence of necessary parties, specifically the sellers and the land authority, rendered the proceedings and judgment of the Trial Tribunal null and void.
Source excerpt
The appellant failed to prove ownership of the disputed land due to contradictory evidence and lack of credibility. Adverse possession cannot be claimed simultaneously with purchase, and permissive occupation is not adverse possession. Both parties had locus standi based on pleadings. Non-joinder of the purported seller's legal representative was irrelevant as the purchase claim was not substantiated.
Source excerpt
High Court Land Division strike-out ruling on a land dispute, holding the suit incompetent for non-joinder of necessary parties and lack of 90 days’ notice.
Explore more
