Shija s/o Kasimba vs Kuluna s/o Shilangu (Pc Civil App. No, 10 of 2000) [2000] TZHC 464 (31 August 2000)

I IN TIE IlIGH COUR-1' OF Tli.NZ).NIA .,.:• · . . i'.\l\ TABORA '·: ' • ..... . PC CIVIL APP.No, 10 oF 2000 NZEGA DISTRICT COURT CIVIL APP~ NO. 15/99 ORG. NYASA PRIM.ARY COURT CIVIL CASE NO. 3/99 SHIJA S/O KASIMBA ••• ••• ••• • •• APPELLANT VERSUS KUL:!A s/o SHILANGU ••• ••• ••• • •• • • • RESPONDENT JUDGMENT This is a second appeal. The appellant Shija Kasimba has lost in the two Courts below, He is still aggrieved hence this appeal to this Court. C The facts of the case are not involving• though interesting. The respondent is said to be an old man of che age of over 90 years. The case in the two Court be~ew and here has been prosecuted by a son. The son who was holding power of attorney informed me that his father is just too old to walk to Court. The other side, the appellant,retorted back that the respondent could not be that old. He asserted that if he was all that old, how did to he get the strength to go!seduce the daughter of the appellant. Then, the son of the respondent retorted back and said that the truth uf the matter was that his father, for whom he was holding a power of attorney, sent semeone to seduce on his behalf. In order to impress the Court that the age of his father does not matter, he informed •••/2 ..

•r•.- ., .,. the Court that his father has three other wives, This onei the subject matter of the case,was going tt be a fiurih onei The facts of the case as aeed b the two Clurts below are ,··c that this old man~ the one aged 90 9 went to the respondent; a father of a girl who did not testifyj Of course the 90 year old person sent someone to negotiate for a marriage. The appellant ·agreed t6 have his daughter married to the 90 year old man, Meanwhile the ae•tual daughter had gone to a native doctir for treatment·~ We are not told wat she had been suffering fr&m. Trere, it is said, in the Course ef the treatment, she git pregnant Butt it f,3-S not before the appellant had received 13 head of cattie; shs 2Q,000/= and Shs 1500/=, as dowry. The girl came back to her parents; the appellant• Two months later she gave birth to twins• One, hbwever, died immediately after death. The resplndent had heard of the pregnancy and had als• heard of the birth of the twins, Andt the respondent, had never gohe through a wedding ceremkny+ suggestig alst that he had never consumated the marriage, ~he respondent, therefore asked for his dewry back. The appellant refused to give back the dowry. He put up a case that the respondent had know!1 of the pregnancy before and had dire,tly or indirectly accepted to marry the daughter with the pregnancy. Indeed, the matter went to the primary Ceurt of Nyasa, there in Nzegao The assertion$ of the appellant were not. accepted by the Court. And C"'t'"CU 8n appeal to the District Cflurt, the district magistrate has also thrown over- board those asserti•ne. • •• /3.

... PC .CIVIL APP .No; 10 OF: 2000 - 2 -. ---·-·------- ., I arrl also thrc,wing over .. 'board those a$ieft:i,on,s. It is glarririgly clear here that the daughtr of the appellant w.as maqe pegnant at .: ~ ~ the place of the native d ♦ ctlr. There is no evidence to show that . . . ' . . . ' the respondent agreed to marry the pregnant daμghter of tho appellant• . . As suggeste by the primary Court and the firt appellate C<:>urt, the appellant nmst return the l3 had of cattle~ the shs 20000/= and the Shs 1,500/=• This appeal is dismissed with costs. At Taborc1. 31st August 2000 Appellant: present Responde: represented by a son JUDGE Appellant: Sir, I do not have the 13 head of cattle right now Can I pny by instalment? Court: Go and write a letter. ppellnt: I will dose. J .E.C. MASANCHE JUDGE I 31/8/2000 I , I I