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 respondent failed to prove purchase and ownership of the disputed land as he did not produce a sale agreement, credible witnesses, or evidence that the seller had good title; the appellant's evidence was more convincing and supported by witnesses, thus the appeal is allowed and the DLHT decision is quashed.
Source excerpt
Court of Appeal of Tanzania upheld dismissal of a land dispute appeal, holding the suit was about trust property, the power of attorney was valid, and the transferees were lawful owners.
The High Court declared Wilmar Tanzania Limited the lawful owner of disputed land after finding it paid the full purchase price and the defendant failed to transfer title or deliver possession.
Refusal to sign transfer documents alone does not constitute a cause of action on land dispute; the plaint failed to state the defendant's status regarding the property and failed to establish a wrongful act by the defendant. The plaintiff's grievances appear directed at the Commissioner for Lands, not the defendant.
Source excerpt
The evidence established that the 1st respondent was the owner of the suit land and sold it to the 2nd respondent, whose interest remained valid despite incomplete transfer. The appellant failed to prove ownership or connection to the suit land. Grounds of appeal lacked merit and were dismissed.
Source excerpt
The respondent, having purchased the suit land first and obtained approval of disposition from the Commissioner for Lands, had a better title than the appellant. The seller, Juma Said Jongo, had already transferred his interest to the respondent in 2010 and could not pass any valid title to the appellant in 2018. The issuance of the Certificate of Title to the appellant was void as it was based on non-existing rights. The principle of priority and nemo dat quod non habet applied, rendering the appellant's claim meritless.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a land appeal, holding that the respondent was the earlier purchaser and lawful owner of the plot under the priority principle.
Second land appeal dismissed after the High Court found sufficient evidence that the appellant had consented to transfer the disputed land.
The District Land and Housing Tribunal's judgment was fundamentally irregular and improper because the opinions of assessors were not recorded in writing nor read in the presence of the parties, rendering the judgment null and void.
Source excerpt
The proceedings and judgment of the District Land and Housing Tribunal were fundamentally irregular due to failure to record and consider assessors' written opinions as required by law, rendering the judgment improper and necessitating a retrial before a different Chairperson and the same set of assessors.
Source excerpt
Explore more
