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 3rd respondent had already exchanged the disputed land with the 1st respondent in 1984, as evidenced by a written and witnessed agreement. Therefore, the 3rd respondent had no title to transfer to the appellant in 2009. The appellant failed to prove ownership, and the trial tribunal's decision was correct.
Source excerpt
The respondent established lawful acquisition of the disputed one acre of land by purchase from the original owner, supported by credible evidence, while the appellants' evidence was inconsistent and failed to prove valid acquisition. The process of survey and title acquisition by the appellants was void ab initio as it was based on land not validly acquired. Joinder of the Registrar of Title and other parties was unnecessary as no relief was sought against them.
Source excerpt
The suit was not barred by res judicata as parties and issues differed; the respondent lawfully acquired the disputed land by sale (exchange of cattle for land); appellants' evidence was insufficient and respondent's evidence was heavier, justifying dismissal of the appeal.
Source excerpt
Plaintiff proved ownership by certificate of title; defendants trespassed without consent; plaintiff entitled to vacant possession, demolition, injunction, general damages, but failed to strictly prove specific damages claim.
Source excerpt
The preliminary objection is overruled because the alleged time-bar is based on disputed facts requiring evidence, not a pure point of law.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed the land appeal, holding the dispute was res judicata and setting aside the tribunal’s judgment and orders.
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 High Court at Babati granted an uncontested interim injunction preserving the applicant’s title to Plot No. 24 Block H pending determination of the main land suit.
Plaintiffs failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the disputed plots formed part of the estate of the late Said Ally Sufiani. The 1st defendant, as holder of certificate of title, has the best title to the land. There was insufficient evidence of prior ownership or continuous possession by the plaintiffs' predecessor. The allocation of plots to the 2nd and 3rd defendants was lawful. Plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
Source excerpt
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
Explore more
