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 High Court dismissed an objection to sale in execution, holding that the applicant was a party to the consent decree and could not stop attachment of his property.
The High Court struck out an objection application as premature because no attachment order had yet been issued against the property.
The court held that since objection proceedings regarding the property are pending and the hearing date is imminent, maintaining the status quo would not cause undue injustice to the respondents. Therefore, the applicant's prayer for interim protection of the property was granted.
Source excerpt
Objection proceedings under Order XXI Rule 57(1) CPC are available to non-parties alleging interest or possession in attached property. The applicants provided prima facie evidence of ownership and possession, sufficient for summary proceedings. The priority principle is not determinative in execution proceedings; the main inquiry is whether the property belongs to the judgment debtor. The applicants' properties are to be excluded from execution.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a land appeal and upheld compensation to a respondent whose house and customary land rights were affected by a later survey and occupancy grant.
The High Court held that an appeal from objection proceedings in execution was incompetent. The proper remedy for a dissatisfied objector was to file a fresh suit.
The execution order issued by the DLHT was inconsistent with the decree of the Ward Tribunal as it introduced terms not contemplated in the original decree, specifically by ordering demolition of a wall, which exceeded the executing court's jurisdiction. However, the objection to execution was filed after the execution order was granted, so the tribunal cannot be faulted for not entertaining it.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed preliminary objections in a land revision matter, holding that objection proceedings under Regulation 23(5) are not governed by Order XXI Rule 62 CPC.
The High Court allowed a land appeal, quashed a tribunal ruling, and ordered a retrial after finding the tribunal improperly decided a settled boundary issue.
The application was struck out because the supporting affidavit was incurably defective for lack of endorsement and drawer's name, and the application was premature as there was no order for attachment in the pending execution proceedings.
Source excerpt
Explore more
