Salehe Kamwanya vs William Francis (PC Civil Appeal No 137 of 1995) [1999] TZHC 98 (3 March 1999)

.. , IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA .. DAR ES SALAAM DISTRICT REGISTRY AT DAR ES SALAAI''l PC. CIVILAPFEAL N0.137 OF 1995 • SALEHE KAiviVJANYA •••••••••••• ~ APPELLANT · VERSUS WILLIAI"i FRANCIS . . . . . . . . . . . . ,.. RESPONDENT • BUBESHI J: · . . , In this appeal, the appellant is aggrieved by the deciions • • 1' • of both trial court and the first appellate court which decided that the land in dispute belonged· to the respondent., and not him •. There is ample evidence to support that fin:iing and I uphold it. .1 ' However it was wrong for the District Court to order the appe1lant to uproot the trees he Plantd. · We do not plant trees for·the fun of it - trees are valuable objets and ought to be preserved at all costs and at all tirnes. And siI'.ce 'there is a finding that the land in question belongs to the respondent, it would be l..,.L...}._rc;J..r to allow the appellant to· enter the land for the purposes of tendering the trees. The orD.y sensible option is for the respondent to corupensat the appel1ant the value of the trees on.the land and this will. enable the respondent to get back his land as well as the trees. I therefore direct that the relevant authorities· in Kilosa District ... Forestry department should take stock of all the trees on the land and have them valued. Thereafter the respondent should compensate the aPPellant to the tune of the amount- assessed before he can take possession of the I land. The appellant is' not opposed to this proposition in terms of ground 5 °of his filed memorandum of appeal • . L so oder an:l each party to bear own costs. Delivered before Parties. , ,.- . . . l /\ . iL, ;)' llf:,. .. ,·, // \ i'I . '· ; _ _) ( '. ,,..'Jt-;;7A--t a Ao G. BUBESHI JUDGE 3/3/99 ..