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
Plaintiff's evidence was consistent and credible, supported by witnesses with longstanding knowledge of the land and documentary evidence. Defendant's evidence was contradictory, lacked documentary proof of allocation, and failed to establish lawful acquisition. The land belonged to the plaintiff's deceased father, and defendant was merely a guardian, not owner.
Source excerpt
The District Land and Housing Tribunal erred in dismissing the application for non-joinder of the Kenyana Village Council as a necessary party because neither the pleadings nor the respondents' claims established the village council as a necessary party. The dismissal was premature and not justified by the facts or law. The trial Chairman should have ascertained necessity before dismissal, and the law allows for joinder at any stage if justice requires.
Source excerpt
High Court case over 350 acres in Bariadi: the plaintiff proved long occupation and lawful acquisition, succeeded on ownership and eviction, but most special damages failed.
The High Court held the sellers failed to prove legal title to the disputed land and ordered compensation from them, while declaring the land belongs to Okutu and Losokonoi villages.
The appellant's evidence was more credible and consistent than the respondents', and the respondents' testimonies contradicted their pleadings. The trial tribunal erred in evaluating the evidence and in relying on a certificate of title issued contrary to the law governing village land. The disputed land belongs to the appellant as administrator of the deceased's estate.
Source excerpt
The applicants' grievance concerns allocation of village land, which is a land dispute subject to the dispute resolution mechanisms under the Village Land Act. The applicants failed to exhaust available remedies before approaching the High Court. Therefore, the application is incompetent for being prematurely filed without exhausting statutory remedies.
Source excerpt
The allocation of 360 hectares to the first respondent was unlawful as it exceeded the statutory threshold and lacked proper approval. The applicants have established interest and possession in the disputed land. The attachment was invalid and the land remains under the administration of the second applicant.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that Paulo Songati proved ownership of 10 acres, rejected the defendants’ contradictory evidence, and declared the village council a trespasser.
The High Court dismissed a land claim over 980 acres at Malula, holding that the land had been lawfully allocated under operation vijiji and that the village council remained owner.
Plaintiffs failed to prove ownership as the Village Council lacked legal mandate to allocate land in a declared planning area; no evidence of village assembly approval; exhibits did not establish location or extent of land; thus, plaintiffs not entitled to relief.
Source excerpt
Explore more
