Mufindi Paper Mills Limited vs Ibatu Village Council and Others (Civil Revision No. 555/17 of 2019) [2022] TZCA 3108 (19 September 2022)

MUFINDI PAPER MILLS LIMITED VERSUS IBATU VILLAGE COUNCIL AND THREE OTHERS COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: MWAMBEGELE. J.A, LEVIRA J.A and RUMANYIKA J.A.) CIVIL REVISION NO. 555/17 OF 2019 (Revision arising from the decision of the High Court of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam dated 30 th day of October 2015 in Civil Application No. 532/17 of 2017) Land Laws, Application for revision- nullification of Certificate of occupancy – Whether the trial judge was proper to order nullification of the Certificate of occupancy of the Applicant without being given the right to be heard. This application was brought under section 4(3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, seeking revision of the proceedings and decision of the High Court (Land Division) dated 30th October, 2015. The application was supported by the applicant’s Principal Officer, while the respondents opposed it by affidavit. The background arose from Land Case No. 201 of 2009, in which the 1st respondent successfully sued the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th respondents for recovery of land at Ibatu Village, Njombe. In that suit, the High Court nullified the applicant’s Certificate of Title on the basis of improper allocation, despite the applicant not being a party to the proceedings. The applicant only became aware of the decision about one and a half years later and, after obtaining an extension of time, filed the present revision. The sole ground of the application was that the applicant had been lawfully registered as owner of the land but was condemned unheard when its title was extinguished, contrary to Article 13(6)(a) of the Constitution. The respondents supported the application, conceding that nullification of the applicant’s title without a hearing was irregular. Both parties urged the Court to find the

proceedings flawed for violation of the right to be heard, to nullify them, and to make appropriate consequential orders, including a retrial. The Court had to decide on whether the trial judge was proper in ordering nullification of the applicant’s Certificate of Occupancy without affording the applicant the right to be heard. Held: (i) The Court held that on account of that breach of fundamental right to be heard, in exercise of the provisional powers conferred on us under section 4 (3) of the AJA, we are inclined to accede to the uncontested prayer of Mr. Rwechungura and hereby grant the application with costs Application was granted with costs. Statutory Provisions referred to: (i) Section 4 (3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Cap. 141 RE 2002 Article 13(6) (a) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1977. (ii) Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Code, Cap. 33 R.E 2019. (iii) Section 4 (3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act. Caselaw referred to: (i) Patrobert D. Ishengoma v. Kahama Mining Cooperation Ltd and 2 Others, Civil Application No. 172 of 2016 (unreported). (ii) Tang Gas Distributors Ltd v. Mohamed Salim Said and 2 Others, Civil Revision No. 68 of 2011 (unreported). (iii) Rukwa Autoparts and Transport Ltd v. Jestina George Mwakyoma [2003] TLR 251. (iv) Eco Tech (Zanzibar) Limited v. Government of Zanzibar, ZNZ Civil Application No. 1 of 2007. (v) DPP v. Sabina Tesha & 2 Others [1992] T.L.R 237. Charles Rwechungura for the Applicants. Hangi Chang’a and Stella Machoke for respondents