Dickson Mwakyusa vs Yona Mwakambinda (PC Civil Appeal No. 39/98) [1999] TZHC 376 (30 November 1999)

.) l ]).m rn_ THE flffI-n-?URT OF TANZANIA ATA. PC CIVIL b.PPEJ.\L N0.39/98 ( fr·dir/ h Dci$ion Qf District court of Rungwe • .1,, • • . . . • •'' • ,· •• ~ ~ • - ... . . a(f.TukriY.R.¥1 PC Civil ,ij;p.,Np.31/97) • : J :'[ :.:,:,\• • • t • , '. •. •• V , ;" '-.' ( .... : , .. : ·, ~ . ' ; ; . DICKSON' MWAKYlJSA • o'o ~ ~ • o o··o'o·, o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o·o o oAPPELIAN,'f ' ' ' • • C JUDGEMENT MWIPOPO J, . , . . ·.·.:).-.:i ... ...-~~~-· ·.' The respondent Yona Mwf,3-kambinda has never attended any court in this ·case from the .time t was: f.iled on 22/6/199'i Jfthe trial ceurt -ii"' :,;, . ,:; :.:: of Lupa\a.rf.imai-Y, Court Rungwe Di_s_trict up to the District Court of ~ . . . . . . . ·,··,. Rungwe,:· •n f~~-~ appeal and to this court• .. :~rt·· .. ,,I":," He :~as never testified either this case appears to b'e e. bogus and fabricated civil case just as there are bogus and criminal charges. l..1e Yonah s/• Mwakambinda sued Dickson s/o Mwakyusa the pr,:~sent··t . appellant en 21/12/92 claiming land ownership from the appellant. That has termi:p.~ted on 15/2/93 in favour o:f~he said Yonah Mwakambinda ari 0 d I", .: .· the appellant. ab.i.~ted .and adhered to the decre,e of the .that case as the . .. -. . . ' .·. ,J...... ·;j Judgemei:it de'!=>.t<:>r t<;:>,. th.e. full satis!}'-ction of the trial judgement's holdings. the tetj:oh;· bf Dw ·:·2 D·{ks;n Mwakyusa g{vlf:tBh·J.°2/8/199'8 !.;._ ·. ::' ,That was at the trial '11. . t •! •? ' ,, ' • • court before the. learned_ Mr: Kiflenzf (Pii; Coitt Maistrate)' in this case which testimony was quite authentic ftri.'d b'i1ievedby the' 'trial Magistrate. That is why the same trial Magistrate gave a dissenting Judgement in favour of the appellant in these words, I quote from the verdict of the trial Magistrate the learned Mr• Kalenzi Primary Court Magistrate: II Hakimu ... Mimi sikubaliani kabisa na washauri kwa sababu wadaawa wa-likwisha patct.<'1.a nyumbani katika kesi ya awali 0 •· ••• 2

t;_ Hwcumu o o ~ .. o •• W ashaur i 11 wa Mahakruna walimuunga. mkono mdai kwarnba alipwe O Lakini mimi nakataa na kusema kuwa hakuna sababu y,a ·m4'ai kulipwa mara mbili. Vilevil~ spamba la ugomvi wadaawa walikwisha patana kwa suluhu iliyokwisha.pitika 11 o The quoted above portiol'.!,,.is · an extrattion from the magistrate verdic:t and hie/ Ju.dgemE}nt ·:tp, · the present. c?.,se which in short supported .. · .. the appellant•s testimony·in-defence in this case that he wiis' ndt liable to pay the presently clairped Shs.ll8,800/== as C9sts' and. loss of farm produce ll•Fel&ii®l'l"·t®,the ·1992 Civil case No.177/1992 between the said Yonah Mwakambinda and the present appellant Dickson Mwakyusa • . The above quated Swahili portion of the verdict and Judgement means in English tha.t the learned Magistrate: ·dissents from the majority verdict of, the 2 gentlemen Assessors who ent§r udgement in: fav9:r. 9f the.'.pntff beause the learned . . ' Magi 1 rte. finds tha.,· .. the ,plaintiff annot be paid the bill bf costs:,tY-'.}ce moreover the farm in '.dispute .was fally adjudicate upon and fully sttled' by agreement. in court, these is every ground to support'.. \he uH version of the preskt appellant that the original civil case N"'177/1992 between Yonah Mwakanibinda and himself was indeed seittlement by Compromise ·rea'ched in court and fu:1.ly satisfied in t.his e:x:cut:l.on because the case,.,,; lasted :tri court for ()nly lj( months having been :f;iled on 21/12/1992 · determined on 15/2/19.93. • , ... I . ·J: ·· _,·-u··.. :··:.fl!.I.J.~- '.>\ -• :·,r ·.• tf: ·•·· &l Jhe ,otl':~.:;'.;.;h?W:q,, ,,;t,:rw 9r{mt Mwak1cda 1 h•:test3/tf:.dta,§ DWI came to, court -:,1:±t,.,Lup§Jit,a ,frimc:rr.c;q:r4rt p!J. s?/2.{';<q?ri8+a~g1:Lng;9 rfJ;?V _ :a letter ., , 1 _, tif one Jol"\a.l7,_J1waI)lb;i,nda .'i'?~~h .tly,:.14e~~ of_r:1.uwat.c1 ,SeoD,:μ<'jX'lf Scll,o,ol ,, , S .L.P. 402 Tukuyu dated 26/5/97 which requested the Primary Mag¼f?trat~ to' ta:i his bill of costs of the p:eevious civil itas Nool77/92 between himself~~ Dick,E>on ,s/e MwS9-o ,; 18- !?rayed t9:oEi-,iTe tc)Xed bill qf u ·costs to be co+l.ected by Grontor;y: .Mwak,¥1bing:ifqr( e :hi,tj5:elf w9::;, tra;·elling . back to Dar es Salaom. • •• 3 . /.· _'.,..J} -:·,; ',!

J ·• " .;. 3 - ( 1 'Naomba malipo hayo akabidhiwe mdogo wangu Grantory Mwakambinda. Mimi nat:egemea kusaf:i.ri kurudi kazini 11 ). •~ the basis of· this letter Grantony Mwakabinda ofered up this case and presented it to its finality,. and ex:cutlon .!or he'·''Wp.ffe_ giyen by the .. (~ ·• : ' .-Magistrate a portion 01 thf:l farm of the appellant with crops':in' :t as·· 'l ,-_ payment of the deci'etal sum of Shs 0 ll8800/:: entered by the 1)rimary' cour't t ";',., on major:i,. ty. fil•e of the lady ·and gentlemen assessors • . • 1 • e disputed letter octb-be:t' 20/6/1997" of Yonah Mwakambinda _has _:. .. .J ·• , .,;: •:, t t•:. . r: . r. certainly a bogus one• n· contained·· an address of Lupata Seondary, T .f. -•. .·, .. . • • • . , , ,.)L . • .. • - J_ ,:.;~, ;_ t:•• , .. .;~ ;::;: '. ., ~~ School where as the true Yona Mwakambinda was working in'I) e_e Slaam .•· ' and should have cont?-inetl his· Dar es Salaam ··address. .. : -f h Moreover the tru ,. eur.:. n:,•. Yna used to write his' name ·as Yonah with an 'lh!•. at ·the .end as clely . .-,· ' . ,,.J •. :. shown in the espect of the··record. of the Primary Court of ivil case Nool77/92 whereas this Yona of this letter had no &uch 11 hu at the end of· the Yona fa.gain, the. lette; of 20/5/97 has not signe_ at •q.].l,, Only L • .. · the name Y:on Mwaj{:ambinda was scribed at the end of it. Anybody could .-..,·:· have written the Jona Mwakambinda. It is the a,9::-ued signatur.e .. which . ~ . . . . . . distingu.sh~''s a written document moreover by the time the case was oened r!:. up on 22/5/97 'the Rspondent y Olla ,phould ,have ·a1re·ady gone ,-to Par es,.. sait· • I'. ... . ,; • ' , ,'T' . ~t . ,. t• work but that :i,.s ··why he fo\1nd a need ;,to write a letter if !le was p:test'm:t; ·- !• • . :: ·:' in court 0:.1 22/5/97 wher. he· opened up this: case in person there would bE;J . . : . t, no need of f:1-ling_ in court a letter of approving Grantony Mwakambinda

• .. -.r. ;_ ... _ .. ·J ollect his truced bii dated 29/5/97 he would have written the letter dated I\ : • •.-• 22/5/97 awards •n backwards. ::-·-:-,> -: !:;·! r, . : ." ...... '.L:,- : . t ,, .. . ... ,

• 4 - r. It appears it we.s of Grant Mwakambinda himself he opened up this suit e.s:p9nq.n to be, Y.o{i Mwakamb:i..nda;.and he' signed the complaint form as ;· . ,J . • . ' ,, 11. ~ .:,.1, Yona. Mw_ajcambinda instead· o.f f:iigiiing as Grant Mwakbinda with power of .. ·· .. , .. . ... . :,.J, · ...... _,. •·.. ·- . .- . attorney '.l)r:esumably to act iGr:-iha' Mwakambinda. It helter be more clear even i-L·the' letter of Yonah Mwak.bihda had ,., . . . ..,4$ . .c . been a genuine orie''i t di'd not appoipt Grant Mwakambiri'da as h:br<' ,.:l"r representative to sue on his behalf by power of attoneny ·,ltc. It appointed Granty. Mwakambinda (presumably Grantony·is the same ,. as Granty) J9r:(.-purposes of collecting on hs behalf the truced costs only ··,'.- '•,'t· •. \ not to· sue ,o his ._b_ehalf o fy,!·f; ./ _ Worst of al-1,,even if. the said Yonah had appointed G;mtony as his representative to._.μe on his_ b'eh-:ilf that was a mere application which ¥. • ' ,; ' .. ,,.. -'\·· should have been deliberted upon :by the court and adecision made to allow Grant to prosecute the case on behalf of Yond1<1 Such decision this being a Primary Curt ·cae should have been made by the entire panel o·-- of the 2 assess¢rs and I r.iagistrate by majority verdict. The reo::>rd I ' . ~ shows no such,step_was ever taken., :'I.- .":t 0.1ce !!ti.ch \1. representative pr;oseo-:1tor of the case had be@rt granted permission tu proseo'Jte. for the plaintiff there would still be· need to ; ' . . ' j . ,. ' ,; .. t":.: ' call. tM actual Yonah as a witness O;). the 'ci.&y. of the trial., In this case 'i:,, . ' , .. ,, ,·,- . the fake represe;tatie '.prosecutr ,Jstified himself putting himself ~ ~ ,. . . . ' •. ' i, in, the shoes of Yonah as DWI and claimed the oJsts,'.and everithing from what had been by the actl\al Yonah about Y6nah 9 s trv~l from Dar es Salaam tq Ll,pata whet he ·ate and drink "n the waf':~he alu of the coffee harvested and the value of bananas harvested for 3 years from the previous 177/1992 5 years before the case was opened upo

...,., 5 - ' ·:-:A11 this testi!l}ony of Gr?.,.nt Mwakambinda was mostly mere hear say, . , . ' which. "ould at be c3. basis for establishing the actual · · costs·· '.inrcurred'· e)ccepJ; pehaps for the one receipt of a.··bus fare from · , . Dar · es Salaam to Tukuyu dated 9/4/97 for Shso?,800/= by Matema Beach .... · Video Coacho But· this. is not relevant to the costs of civil case No. ' . ·.• .. 177/92 wh:i.ch terminated on 15/2/93 at this case of 1997 which has filed on 22/5/97! This receipt is as bogus and conveted as the lett'er of Yonah .. . . ~ ·,. . . . Mwa.kambinda ·of 20/5/97 . . · The other Respondent Costs of value of coffoe harve.sted. of Bhs.,57 0000/= and· haiwested banas valued at Shs.,25g000/= conveted to have been· . •. included· in the 1992 suit,o Al .any rae that is part of a bill of costs ef a· determind case but:.-v,/ould have to a cortiously established freh .. . . .. .. claim•independent of a bill of costs of a determined case • ·..!. .. This entire case was a. pure a scum meant to scandalize a.."1·d th:i.rt with the appe.lnts 1?"11:s_l'.\e:. freedom and rights for fra::idulent means of the court processe ... \ Even the majority of Verdict of the assessors taxed the costs at only ¼ the filed costs at only Shse.50 ,C?'Xl/= o But tl:ie trial . .- ~ :>-- i magistrate entered his own love verdict of U:-11 c,la,:ipi o Sps,.118 1 500/= which was qui ce illegal to he was found to follow the ,ma)ori ty Vendict of the 50,000/= taxed Costs., All what followed after the erronous and illegal Judgeme_nt of. the . Primary Court has done in execution of the taxed Cost of Shsp.8,500/= including the division of the. fm·· b.trd ±;ts' boundary 9-emas_ations iQ.one in 1997 by the primary court at the 1998 by the District Court mere illegal~ ,· ' ., ..

6 - The Judgement of the District Court to·as erous it did not address itself to the aboe explained bogus<°'-j:'lrbsecUtian- of; this case •. After the present cases Primary curt ·magistrate ·had entered. his dissenting Vs:1_rdict he should have folloed tii~ hied-to the District court• for c0nfirmation of the maji ty verdict. of the ass.essors instead pf hai ting until the appellant had appelled on his own against the e~tire deci.3ion of the Primary Court. The entire Primary Court proceedings were .ill-eg 0 1 null and void • .They are quashed. The decision of the District court has. also erroncius • .... ~ ·, .!_ It is quashed there is no need to above a new trial because. the entire claim is nexatious frivous arid Scandalou 9 • The suit of cc No.177/92 was ti·ially determined and executed fi:rfe years agoo-: This present. cctse is a indeed a bogus as to use 1the appellant 1 -s words ,a ''bought;r case·• c:-..llowed with costs here and in lower courts. t:6oram: .. Hono E oL.K._ .. Mwipopo, J-.. · Appellant: present in person Dickson Mwakyusa Respondent: present in person Yona Mwakambinda B/C: Kosam. Sgd: EoLo:K;o MwipopQ JUDGE 27/ll/99 Ct: Judgment delivered in them presence both not of appeal explained Sgd: EoLoKo Mwipopo JUDGE 30/11/98 Certified true copy of the origal __ ~ .. ---f-- . :--::-----...:: --;--.,, V 1·//·J•...,;.--r,,,,.--·