LAND CASE BHOKE SELEMAN
The High Court at Musoma recorded a consent judgment settling a land dispute over alleged road reserve plots, with compensation to be paid before demolition.
- Road reserve
- Demolition
- Compensation
- Injunction
- Ownership
- Land-law
Tanzania Source-linked decisions Coverage checked
Tanzania Case Law
Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
- Courts on this page
- 3 court collections
- Last checked
Search and filter Tanzania case law
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
john baptist medard milinga vs attorney general 3 others 2024 tzhclandd 53 20 february 2024
The High Court held that the plaintiff lawfully owned the land, and TANROADS’ demolition was unlawful because statutory acquisition and compensation procedures were not followed.
- Right of occupancy
- Land acquisition
- Compensation
- Road reserve
- Title rectification
- Land-title
SCANNED Misc
Applicants established a prima facie case due to disputed ownership and status of the land, demonstrated risk of irreparable loss through potential loss of homes, and the balance of convenience favored applicants as they would suffer greater harm if the injunction was refused. All conditions for granting a mareva injunction were met.
Source excerpt
- Mareva injunction
- Temporary injunction
- Road reserve
- Demolition of property
- Irreparable loss
- Prima facie case
juma maro makore 13 others vs tanzania national road agency another 2023 tzhclandd 16706 20 july 2023
The High Court granted a Mareva injunction to preserve disputed land pending expiry of statutory notice, finding a prima facie case, irreparable loss, and greater hardship to applicants.
- Mareva injunction
- Temporary injunction
- Statutory notice to sue government
- Ownership dispute
- Road reserve
- Irreparable loss
edward daudi malila 8 others vs tanzania national road agency 2 others 2023 tzhc 19730 30 june 2023
The High Court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove lawful ownership of land in a road reserve, so the demolition was lawful and no compensation was awarded.
- Compulsory acquisition
- Road reserve
- Compensation for demolition
- Trespass
- Land-law
- Compulsory-acquisition
tanzania national roads agency another vs abdalla magabe sindoma another 2023 tzca 17334 12 june 2023
Respondents' certificate of title was conclusive evidence of ownership; appellants failed to prove the land was within the road reserve; burden of proof regarding road reserve status was on appellants as custodians of highways; trial court did not err in its allocation of burden or findings.
Source excerpt
- Ownership of land
- Road reserve
- Burden of proof
- Compensation for compulsory acquisition
LAND CASE NO
Plaintiff failed to prove defendants trespassed onto his land or caused the alleged damages; evidence insufficient to establish liability.
Source excerpt
- Trespass
- Compensation
- Road reserve
- Burden of proof
amiri salehe mwamba another vs kinondoni municipal council 2022 tzhclandd 12781 19 december 2022
Plaintiffs lawfully acquired the suit land, constructed property per approved plans, and cannot be blamed for survey errors caused by defendants; they are declared lawful owners and entitled to remain unless proper acquisition and compensation procedures are followed.
Source excerpt
- Right of occupancy
- Compensation
- Road reserve
- Survey errors
- Public authority liability
john siringo others vs tanzania national roads agency another 2022 tzca 489 3 august 2022
Appellants failed to prove private ownership of land within 33 feet of road centre prior to initial proclamation; both groups are trespassers and not entitled to compensation; Village Land Act does not override reserved land for roads; road in dispute is district road with width of 33 feet.
Source excerpt
- Compensation for land acquisition
- Road reserve
- Burden of proof
- Villagization policy
- Customary land rights
lameck nyela vs tanzania national roads agency 2 others 2022 tzhclandd 413 31 may 2022
The High Court declared the plaintiff the lawful owner of Plot No. 1347 Block A and held any acquisition for public interest must follow due process and compensation.
- Right of occupancy
- Land ownership
- Road reserve
- Compensation
- Certificate of title
- Demolition notice
Explore more